^{page 328 note 1} Dilthey, Wilhelm, Gesammelte Schriften, vol. 5 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1957), p. 324Google Scholar. Flacius believed there was a progressive distortion of revelation that began soon after the age of the apostles, effected by a train of nonscriptural influences, beginning with Greek philosophy, including the ‘theologians’, and ending with monastic superstitions. Finally, Flacius says, came ‘our age’, when Protestants restored the Bible to its proper place, studying it carefully, proclaiming its meaning to the people, and explaining its mysteries to their salvation, for in the last fifty years (he wrote in the 1560's), the Bible had been more widely distributed, expounded more zealously, and read more faithfully than in the last 1500 years. Moldaenke, G., Schriftverständnis und Schriftdeutung im Zeitalter der Reformation, vol. 1, Matthias Flacius Illyricus, (Stuttgart: W. Kohlhammer, 1936), pp. 123–124Google Scholar.

^{page 328 note 2} Gadamer, Hans-Georg, Truth and Method, (New York: Continuum, 1975), pp. 192–213Google Scholar. Gadamer's use of ‘historicism’ refers to historical positivism with an idealistic bent. I would take Dilthey's Kantianism to embrace a more dualistic and limited understanding of the nature of historical knowledge, which is interestingly displayed in his 1875 essay, ‘Ūber das Studium der Geschichte der Wissenschaften vom Menschen, der Gesellschaft und dem Staat’, Gesammelte Schriften, 5:31–73Google Scholar. For the variable uses of the term, Hamilton, Paul, Historicism, (New York: Routledge, 1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

^{page 329 note 3} Gadamer, , Truth and Method, p. 274Google Scholar and passim. For the anti-historicist implications of Gadamer's hermeneutics, consider also Knapp, Steven and Michaels, Walter Benn, Against Theory 2: Sentence Meaning, Hermeneutics, ed. Wuellner, Wilhelm, Protocol of the Colloquy of the Center for Hermeneutical Studies, (Berkeley: Center for Hermeneutical Studies, 1986), pp. 6–8Google Scholar.

^{page 330 note 4} The same sixty-six books of modern Bibles, the seven apocryphal books, and an additional letter of Paul to the Loadiceans included in a number of Vulgate manuscripts. Metzger, Bruce M., The Canon of the New Testament, (Oxford: Clarendon, 1987), pp. 229–247Google Scholar.

^{page 330 note 5} In fact, some Latin prologues circulated before Jerome and were carried over into fourteen of the twenty earliest manuscripts of the Vulgate. Schild, Maurice, Abendländische Bibelvorreden bis zur Lutherbibel, (Gütersloh: Gerd Mohn, 1970), pp. 71–72Google Scholar.

^{page 330 note 6} Ibid., pp. 69–102.

^{page 331 note 7} ‘Decrees’ refers to the authoritative pronouncements of popes, bishops, councils, and church fathers in the canon law. Didascalicon, iv.2 ‘De ordine et numero librorum’. Petitmengin, Pierre, ‘La Bible à travers les inventaires de bibliothèques médiévales’, Le Moyen Age et la Bible, ed. by Riché, P., Lobrichon, G., (Paris: Beauchesne, 1984), p. 42Google Scholar.

^{page 331 note 8} This was true only of those copies designed for study, which did not comprise the largest number of biblical manuscripts. Other forms and uses: divided for liturgical reading in the mass, in the form of epistolaries or evangelaries, as codices used for the daily readings in a monastery's refectory, less frequently in vernacular translation for private use. Ibid., p. 35 (which does not mention the last use).

^{page 331 note 9} Lobrichon, Guy, ‘Une nouveauté: les gloses de la Bible’, Le Moyen Age et la Bible, p. 98Google Scholar. Commentaries on the Talmud were first written in Mesopatamia (the Abbasid Caliphate) in the ninth century, and in North Africa, Iberia, Italy, France, and Germany since about the beginning of the eleventh century. Waxman, Meyer, A History of Jewish Literature, 4 vols, (New York: Thomas Yoseloff, 1960), 1:250–280Google Scholar. Rabbinical commentaries on the Bible, a literary genre that followed a long tradition of oral commentary and halakic interpretation of scripture, were written since the tenth century in Mesopotamia and the eleventh century in the west. Graboïs, Aryeh, ‘L'exégèse rabbinique’, Le Moyen Age et la Bible, pp. 234–235Google Scholar.

^{page 331 note 10} An early example, a copy of the visions of Ezechiel with interlinear and marginal glosses, was produced by an Irish monk who came to the monastery of Saint Gall, suggesting that the idea if not the text followed the movement of Northumbrian and Irish monks to the continent in the late eighth and early ninth centuries. Lobrichon, ‘Les gloses,’ pp. 98–99.

^{page 331 note 11} The beginning of European theological literature independent of biblical commentary occurred at about the same time, and this apparent departure from exegesis into the systematic analysis of doctrine has often been emphasized. Landgraf, Artur Michael, Einführung in die Geschichteder theologischen Literatur der Frühscholastik, (Regensburg: Gregorius-Verlag, 1948), pp. 39–47Google Scholar. de Ghellinck, J., Le mouvement théologique du xii^e siècle, (Bruges: Editions de Tempel, 1948)Google Scholar. But the fact has often been overlooked that the biblical gloss developed alongside the new literature. Châtillon, Jean, ‘La Bible dans les Ecoles du xii^e siècle’, Le Moyen Age et la Bible, pp. 163–197Google Scholar. For the early history of the Glossa ordinaria, consider Christopher De Hamel, , Glossed Books of the Bible and the Origins of the Paris Booktrade, (Woodbridge, Suffolk: D.S. Brewer, 1984)Google Scholar; Lobrichon, , ‘Les gloses’, pp. 99–110Google Scholar (the most up to date, general account); Smalley, Beryl, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1964), pp. 46–52Google Scholar; Zier, Mark A., ‘The Manuscript Tradition of the Glossa Ordinaria for Daniel, and Hints at a Method for a Critical Edition’, Scriptorium, 47(1993):3–25Google Scholar, esp. 3–5 for a brief summary of scholarship.

^{page 332 note 12} Lobrichon, , ‘Les gloses’, pp. 101, 103, 112–14Google Scholar. The actual textual history of the Gloss is currently the subject of a massive investigation of the manuscripts begun by Karlfried Froehlich and the late Margaret Gibson; they have also provided a facsimile reprint of the one edition that best preserves the format and content of the Glossa ordinaria, the Rusch edition of 1480/81, Biblia Latina cum Glossa Ordinaria, (Turnhout: Brepols, 1992)Google Scholar. Until this project is finished, any description of the history of the Ordinary Gloss must remain provisional, at best.

^{page 332 note 13} But Lobrichon believes that the production of the Gloss was tardy in Central Europe, following upon the late introduction of universities there. Ibid., p. 101 n. 18. Peter Lombard's citations of it in his Four Books of Sentences, the basis of theological lectures in universities up to the sixteenth century, and its use by Peter Comestor, chancellor of the university of Paris in the third quarter of the twelfth century (who composed the gloss on the four gospels and a widely used compendium of biblical history, the Historia scholastica), ‘canonized’ the Ordinary Gloss. Ibid., p. 110.

^{page 332 note 14} The term was adapted from classical usage by Jerome in the late fourth century and revived by humanists in the early sixteenth century to describe a work that moves from textual analysis to an oration built out of the text. Froehlich, Karlfried, ‘Bibelkommentare—Zur Krise einer Gattung’, Zeitschrift für Theologie und Kirche 84(1987):465–492Google Scholar.

^{page 333 note 15} Landgraf, Einführung, pp. 35–39, 40–42. De Ghellinck, , Mouvement, pp. 133–148Google Scholar.

^{page 333 note 16} Châtillon, ‘Les écoles’, pp. 172–75.

^{page 333 note 17} Smalley, , Study, p. 179Google Scholar. Châtillon, ‘Les écoles’, p. 195. Morey, James H., ‘Peter Comestor, Biblical Paraphrase, and the Medieval Popular Bible’, Speculum 68 (1993): 10CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

^{page 334 note 18} The name consists of two words, ‘post ilia’, ‘after that’, or ‘after those things’. No one knows to what ‘that’ refers. Mark Zier's guess is the best I know. He suggests it derives from a reference to the Ordinary Gloss, ‘post illam glossam’, which had received its final shape shortly before Hugh of St. Cher's postilla was compiled. Zier, ‘Glossa Ordinaria’, p. 15. See also Smalley, , Study, pp. 270, 272Google Scholar.

^{page 334 note 19} The four principal mendicant orders were the Franciscans, the Dominicans, the Augustinian Hermits, and the Carmelites, whose theologians played a very important role in the development of scholastic exegesis.

^{page 334 note 20} Klenkok, Johannes, Questiones super totam maleriam canonice Johannis, Oxford, Bodleian Library, Hamilton Ms. 33, ff. 247ra-258vaGoogle Scholar. Ocker, Christopher, Johannes Klenkok: A Friar's Life, c. 1310–1374, v. 83/5 of the Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, (Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society, 1993), p. 33Google Scholar.

^{page 334 note 21} A widely distributed example was a sermon collection of the pre-Hussite reformer, Konrad Waldhauser, known as the Postilla Pragensis. Schnever, Johannes Baptist, Repertorium der lateinischen Sermones des Mittelalters, 9 vols., (Mūnster: Aschendorff, 1969–1980), nos. 72ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 335 note 22} Johannes Müntzinger, Liber lectionum sancti Pauli, Basel, Universitätsbibliothek, AV 28, ff. 146–226. Luther, Martin, First Lectures on the Psalms, 2 vols., edited by Oswald, Hilton C., vols. 10, 11 of Luther's Works, (St. Louis: Concordia, 1974)Google Scholar.

^{page 335 note 23} Asztalos, Monika, ‘The Faculty of Theology’, A History of the University in Europe, vol. 1, Universities in the Middle Ages, edited by De Ridder-Symoens, Hilda, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), pp. 417–420Google Scholar. Verger, Jacques, ‘Studiaet universités’, in Le scuole degli ordini mendicanti (secoli xiii–xiv), vol. 17 of Convegni del Centro di Studi sulla spirituatità medievale (Rimini: Maggioli Editore, 1978), pp. 175–203Google Scholar, for the university and mendicant schools.

^{page 336 note 24} Langton was also the first to try to write commentaries on the entire Bible in imitation of Peter Comestor's Historia scholastica. Verger, Jacques, ‘L'exégèse de l'Université’, Le Moyen Age et la Bible, p. 202Google Scholar. The division of chapters into verses did not occur until the sixteenth century.

^{page 336 note 25} A second alphabetical concordance was compiled at Saint Jacques before this final, influential edition, but it exercised little influence. Mary A. Rouse and Richard Rouse, H., ‘La concordance verbale des Ecritures’, Le Moyen Age et la Bible, pp. 115–122Google Scholar.

^{page 336 note 26} Ocker, Christopher, ‘The Fusion of Papal Ideology and Biblical Exegesis in the Fourteenth Century’, Biblical Hermeneutics in Historical Perspective, edited by Burrows, Mark S. and Rorem, Paul, (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991), pp. 137–143Google Scholar.

^{page 336 note 27} De Ghellinck described the growing distinction between divine speech and reflection upon it by tracing the changing meaning of ‘sacra pagina.’ It referred to the Bible, including glosses on the Bible, but in the thirteenth century, it came to mean theological literature independent of scripture. De Ghellinck, J., ‘“Pagina” et “sacra pagina”. Histoire d'un motet transformation de l'objet primitivement designe’, Melanges Auguste Pelzer (Louvain: Bibliotheque de l'Université, 1947), pp. 23–59Google Scholar. See also Smalley, , Bible, p. 271Google Scholar, and De Vooght, Paul, Les sources de la doctrine chrétienne, (Burges: Descleé De Brouwer, 1954), pp. 27–28Google Scholar.

^{page 337 note 28} ‘non solum voces, sed et res significativae sunt’. Richard of St. Victor, Excerptiones ii.3, ‘de scripturae divinae triplici modo tractandi’, PL 177:205. Absolutely essential is the essay by Ohly, Friedrich, ‘Vom geistigen Sinn des Wortesim Mittelalter’, Schriften zur mittelalterlichen Bedeutungsforschung, (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1977), pp. 1–31Google Scholar.

^{page 337 note 29} ‘In libris autem ethnicorum voces tantum mediantibus intellectibus res significant. In divina pagina non solum intellectus et res significant, sed ipsae res alias res significant. Unde claret scientiam artium ad cognitionem divinarum scripturarum valde esse utilem’. Richard of St. Victor, Speculum ecclesiae, PL 177:375.

^{page 337 note 30} De doctrina christiana, ii. On Christian Doctrine, trans. Robertson, D.W., (Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1958), pp. 34ffGoogle Scholar.

^{page 337 note 31} Hugh of St. Victor, Didascalicon, vi.5, PL 176:805.

^{page 338 note 32} Lobrichon, , ‘Les gloses’, p. 105Google Scholar.

^{page 338 note 33} Smalley, , Bible, pp. 112–195Google Scholar.

^{page 339 note 34} Collationes, xiv.8. Conférences, edited by Pichery, E., 3 vols., Sources chrétiennes, vols 42, 54, 64, (Paris: Éditions du Cerf, 1955–1959), 2:190–191Google Scholar.

^{page 339 note 35} Lang, Albert, Die theologische Prinzipienlehrein der mittelalterlichen Scholastik, (Freiburg: Herder, 1964)Google Scholar. Chenu, M.-D., La theologie comme sciene au xiii^e siècle, 3rd revised edition, (Paris: J. Vrin, 1957), pp. 78–80Google Scholar.

^{page 339 note 36} Smalley, Beryl, ‘Use of the ‘Spiritual’ Sense of Scripture in Persuasion and Argument by Scholars in the Middle Ages’, Recherches de théology ancienne et médiévale, 52(1985):44–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Winkler, Eberhard, Exegetische Methoden bei Meister Eckhart, vol. 6 of Beiträge zur Geschichte der biblischen Hermeneutik, (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr, 1965), pp. 65–69Google Scholar. Thomas Aquinas appears to have consistently avoided the use of spiritual senses in argumentation, but without denying the religious value of non-literal meaning. Aillet, Marc, Lire la Bible avec S. Thomas. Le passage de la litter à a la res dan la Somme théologique, (Fribourg: Éditions Universitaires, 1993), pp. 241–251Google Scholar.

^{page 339 note 37} de Lubac, Henri, L'Exégèse médiévale, vol. 2/2, (Paris: Aubier, 1964), p. 283Google Scholar. Winkler, , Exegetische Methoden, pp. 7–8Google Scholar, who notes that Aquinas saw the ‘sensus parabolicus’ as a kind of literal meaning, whereas Bonaventure, following Peter Lombard, could also contrast parabolic meaning with the historical sense.

^{page 340 note 38} Werbeck, W., Jacobus Perez von Valencia. Untersuchungen zu seinem Psalmenkommentar, v. 28 of Beiträge zur historischen Theologie, (TübingenJ.C.B. Mohr, 1959), pp. 120–121Google Scholar, 130.

^{page 340 note 39} For example, in the fine early fourteenth-century commentary of Jacques Fournier, Postilla super Mattheum, Barcelona, Biblioteca Nacional de Catalunya, Ms. 550, f. 12ra (I follow the orthography of the manuscript): ‘In veteri enim testamento multe erant hystorie que ad devotionem animum non excitabant, ymo magis quandoque ad lasciuiam, sicut patet in multis hystorijs, quandoque etiam ad crudelitatem, sicut etiam patet in multis locis. Hystoria autem noui testamenti omnis excitat homines, si diligenter attendant ad devotionem, et maxime domini facta pro nobis, ac etiam promissa.’ For the commentary, see Maier, Anneliese, ‘Der Kommentar Benedikts XII. zum Matthaeus-Evangelium’, Archivum Pontificum Historicum 6 (1968):398–405Google Scholar.

^{page 340 note 40} Carthusianus, Dionysius, Ennaratio in Job, art. 13, Opera omnia, 42 vols., (Tournai: S.M. de Pratis, 1896–1935), 4:362–363Google Scholar. Consider also Opera 14/2:725. I would not agree that Denys’ exegesis ‘runs together with an hermeneutical and theological deracination’ or that it exemplifies ‘a marked hardening of the lines in the practical employment of the doctrine of the four senses’. Turner, Denys, Eros and Allegory. Medieval Exegesis of the Song of Songs, (Kalamazoo: Cistercian Publications, 1995), pp. 159–174, 411–48, esp. 168–69, 171Google Scholar. Quite the contrary, Denys the Carthusian did not conceive his exegesis of the Song of Songs as an allegory distinct from the historical sense because “Solomon, before his downfall and filled with the Holy Spirit, resplendent with the spirit of prophecy, knew in his spirit the mysteries of Christ,” and he then enumerates precisely those things that pertain to allegorical, tropological, and anagogical senses: they are expressions of the literal sense. Ibid., pp. 414–15. In a similar way the prologue of the Genesis commentary of Nicolaus of Gorran argued for a kind of rhetorical nonliteral sense, in its description of the two-fold way of treating scripture (part of his account of the four ‘causes’ of the Bible): ‘Causa formalis siue modus agendi duplex est, proprius et figuratus. Proprius cum uerba accipiuntur sicut sonant exterius. Figuratus cum aliter accipiuntur quam sonant exterius’. Würzburg, Universitātsbibliothek, M.p.th. 151, f. 11ra.

^{page 341 note 41} Enarratio in Genesis, art. 100, Opera 1:444.

^{page 341 note 42} For rhetorical allegory in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, Brinkmann, Hennig, Mittelalterliche Hermeneutik, (Tūbingen: Max Niemeyer, 1980), pp. 214–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Winkler, , Exegetische Methoden, pp. 85–89Google Scholar.

^{page 341 note 43} Bacon, Johannes, Questiones in quatuor libros Sententiarum et Quodlibetales (Cremona: Marcus Antonius Balpierus, 1618), 2:225, 226Google Scholar.

^{page 342 note 44} Compendium litteralis sensus totius divinae scripturae, Barcelona, Biblioteca de Universidad, Ms. 121, ff. 2vb-3ra: ‘Ascendamus primo cum volatu perspicue meditationis, ut aves, quia scriptum est quod in lege is meditabitur die ac nocte [qui] uult in ea proficere. In sacris quidem litteris profunda est intelligencia requirenda, ubi per uocem ad intellectum, per intellectum ad rem, per rem ad rationem, per rationem peruenitur ad ueritatem’. Consider also Albert the Great, Henry of Ghent, and Jacob Perez of Valencia. de Lubac, , L'Exegese, p. 308Google Scholar. Werbeck, , Jacobus Perez von Valencia, p. 103Google Scholar.

^{page 342 note 45} Consider also Jean Gerson's criticism of the ‘sensus logicalis’ and his insistence that the Bible bears its own logic. Froehlich, Karlfried, ‘“Always to Keep to the Literal Sense Means to Kill One's Soul”: The State of Biblical Hermeneutics at the Beginning of the Fifteenth Century’, Literary Uses of Typology from the Late Middle Ages to the Present, edited by Miner, E., (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1977), pp. 42–43Google Scholar.

^{page 342 note 46} Nicholaus of Gorran, Wūrzburg, Universitätsbibliothek, M.p.th. f. 151, f. 11rb: ‘in canone sacre scripture, id est in novo et veteri testamentis, traditur theologia per modum simplicis narrationis ueritatis simpliciter assentientis. In libro sentenciarum traditur per modum scrutationis ueritatis inquirentis et defendentis compendiose.’ Fischer, M., ‘Des Nicholausvon Lyra Postillae perpetuae in vetuset novum testamentum in ihrem eigenthumlichen Unterschied von der gleichzeitigen Schriftauslegung’, Jahrbücher für Protestantische Theologie, 15/3 (1889): 452Google Scholar. Johannes Michaelis’ gloss may be found in Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Clm. 9411, f. 7r: ‘Quia finis sacrarum scripturanim est Christus et in eo caritas sine diuinus cultus, ideo status nature deducit ad statum legis scripte et ilium ad statum grade sine ad Christum.’ Consider also Wyclif's ‘scopos’ of the poverty and humility of Christ. Benrath, G.A., ‘Traditionsbewußtsein, Schriftverständnis und Schriftprinzip bei Wyclif’, Antiqui und Moderni, edited by Zimmermann, A., vol. 9 of Miscellanea Mediaevalia, (Berlin: Walter De Gruyter, 1974), pp. 359–382Google Scholar, here 367–69. Consider also Bonaventure, , 1 Sent., Prol. quaestio 1, Opera omnia, 10 vols., (Quaracchi: Collegium S. Bonaventure, 1882–1902), 1:7Google Scholar. Aureol, Pierre, Scriptum super primum Sententiarum, edited by Buytaert, E.M., (St. Bonaventure, New York: The Franciscan Institute, 1952–1956), pp. 302fGoogle Scholar.

^{page 343 note 47} Minnis, A.J., Medieval Theory of Authorship, second edition, (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1988)Google Scholar, and for sources in translation, idem, Medieval Literary Theory and Criticism, c. 1100–1375, (Oxford: Clarendon, 1988)Google Scholar.

^{page 343 note 48} Domanyi, Thomas, Der Römerbriefkommentar des Thomas von Aquin, vol. 39 of Basler und Berner Studien zur historischen und systematischen Theologie, (Bern: Peter Lang, 1979)Google Scholar. Aillet, , Lire, pp. 89–98Google Scholar. Winkler, , Exegetische Methoden, pp. 75–84Google Scholar.

^{page 343 note 49} Smalley, Beryl, ‘John Baconthorpe's Postill on St. Matthew’, Medieval and Renaissance Studies, 4 (1958): 91–145Google Scholar, reprinted in idem, Studies m Medieval Thought and Learning, (London: Hambledon Press, 1981), pp. 289ffGoogle Scholar. For Domanyi, Aquinas, Römerbriefkommentar, p. 270Google Scholar. For antecedents, de Lubac, L'Exegese, pp. 305ff. Jean de Hesdin's commentary on Titus goes so far to make each word of the text the title of a theological subject. Ibid., p. 312. Müntzinger, Johann, Expositio super oratione dominica, Würzburg, Universitātsbibliothek, M.ch.f. 109, ff. 316r–330rGoogle Scholar.

^{page 343 note 50} Conflicting interpretations could be adjudicated by appeal to the papacy, a general council, the consensus of patristic opinion, or the exegete–theologians disagreed. See Schūssler, Hermann, Der Primat der Heiligen Schrift als theologisches und kanonistisches Problem im Spätmittelalter, (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1977), pp. 294ffGoogle Scholar. For the way authorities helped negotiate differences in exegesis, consider Ocker, , ‘Fusion’, pp. 131–151Google Scholar. For Wyclif and his desire to interpret consistent with tradition, Benrath, ‘Traditionsbewußtsein.’ Jan Hus had the same desire, but Gabriel Biel, who unlike Hus held the papacy to be an infallible guide of the church's belief, did not describe the literal meaning of the Bible as consistent with papal opinion. Feld, H., Die Anfänge der modernen biblischen Hermeneutik in der spätmitlelalterlichen Theologie, number 66 of Vorträge des Instituts für Europäische Geschichte, (Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner, 1977), pp. 60, 69Google Scholar. Wendelin Steinbach equated scriptural and ecclesiastical authority, ibid., pp. 72–73. Consider also the political exegesis of Jean Major, Ganoczy, A., ‘Jean Major, exegete Gallican’, Recherches de science religieuse, 56 (1968):495Google Scholar. Jean Gerson assumed strong consistency between scripture and patristic opinion. Mark S. Burrows, ‘Jean Gerson on the ‘Traditioned Sense’ of Scripture as an Argument for an Ecclesial Hermeneutic’, Biblical Hermeneutics in Historical Perspective, pp. 152–172Google Scholar.

^{page 344 note 51} Buc, Philippe, L'Ambiguïté du livre. Prince, pouvoir, et peuple dans les commentaire de la Bible au Moyen Age, vol. 95 of Théologie historique, (Paris: Beauchesne, 1994)Google Scholar.

^{page 344 note 52} Meier, Christel, ‘Argumentationsformen kritischer Reflexion zwischen Naturwissenschaft und Allegorese,’ Frühmittelalterliche Studien, 12 (1978): 116–159CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

^{page 344 note 53} Froehlich, Karlfried, ‘Saint Peter, Papal Primacy, and the Exegetical Tradition, 1150–1300’, The Religious Roles of the Papacy: Ideals and Realities, 1150–1300, edited by Ryan, Christopher, vol. 8 of Papers in Mediaeval Studies, (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1989), pp. 3–44Google Scholar.

^{page 344 note 54} A beginning has been made in the study of translations. Hudson, Anne, The Premature Reformation. Wycliffite Texts and Lollard History, (Oxford: Clarendon, 1988), pp. 228–277Google Scholar, summarizes the survey of 250 manuscripts of the Lollard Bible, including the glossed texts and the translations of Jerome's prologues. The glosses were carried out, notwithstanding the points of Lollard doctrine, in a typical scholastic fashion, drawing heavily from the Ordinary Gloss, Nicolaus of Lyra, and a variety of orthodox theologians. James Morey has pointed out the availability of French and English paraphrases of the Bible in the twelfth through fourteenth centuries and the role of the Historia scholastica as source. Morey, , ‘Peter Comestor’, pp. 6–35Google Scholar. See also the chapters by Lockwood, , Foster, , and Morreale, , in The Cambridge History of the Bible, vol. 2, pp. 415–436, 252–65, 465–91Google Scholar. The role of visual images in devotion was directly analogous to the movement from scripture to religious knowledge. Consider Ringbom, Sixton, Icon to Narrative. The Rise of the Dramatic Close-Up in Sixteenth-Century Painting, (AÅbo: AÅbo akademi, 1965)Google Scholar. This may be the field on which to understand the visual communication of both biblical texts and the habits of interpretation that accompanied them.