² Aquinas, St Thomas, Scriptum super libros sententiarum, II, i, 1, 1, Opera omnia, 25 vols (Parma, 1852-73), 6, pp. 384–86.Google Scholar

³ Hamilton, B., ‘Wisdom from the East: the reception by the Cathars of Eastern dualist texts’, Biller, P. and Hudson, A., eds, Heresy and Literacy in the Middle Ages, 1000–1530 (Cambridge, 1994, reprinted with corrections, 1996), p. 45.Google Scholar

⁴ Bonaventure, St, Commentarla in quatuor libros sententiarum, II, i, i, i, Opera omnia, 11 vols (Quaracchi, 1882-1902), 2, pp. 25–7.Google Scholar

⁵ Peter of Tarentaise, In quattuor libros sententiarum commentaria, II, i, 2, 1, 4 vols (Toulouse, 1649–52), 2, pp. 8–9.

⁶ See nn. 14 and 20 below.

⁷ The Summa aurea was edited by Ribailler, J. in the series Spicilegium Bonaventurianum (Paris and Grottaferrata, 1980-7)Google Scholar, with the Summa’s book numbers and the series numbers co-ordinating thus: Lib. 1 = 16; Lib. 2 parts 1–2 = 17 (in two parts not differentiated by number); Lib. 3 part 1 = 18a; Lib.3 part 2 = 18b; Lib. 4 = 19; Introduction = 20.

⁸ Summa aurea, I, Prologue, , Spicilegium Bonaventurianum, 16, p. 16Google Scholar: defensio fidei contra haereticos.

⁹ Droes, F., ‘Guillaume d’Auxerre et les cathares?’, Annuaire-Bulletin de l’École Pratique des Hautes Études Vie Section, 84 (1979-80), pp. 427–8Google Scholar, reports research on the possibility of Guillaume of Auxerre being the Magister G referred to in the Italian Cathar Liber de duobus principiis.

¹⁰ Ed. in Glorieux, P., ‘La somme “Quoniam homines” d’Alain de Lille’, AHDLMA, 20 (1954), pp. 111–364Google Scholar (119-364); for discussion of date, see p. 116.

¹¹ ‘ d’Alverny, M.-T., Alain de Lille. Textes inédits, avec une introduction sur sa vie et ses ouevres (Paris, 1965), p. 156.Google Scholar

¹² Summa aurea, IV, xviii, 1, 1, Spicilegium Bonaventurianum, 19, p. 460.

¹³ Moneta, , Adversus Catharos, IV, viii, i, p. 346b.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Summa aurea, II, viii, i, Spicilegium Bonaventurianum, 17, part 1, p. 168.1 am confining my discussion of arguments about two principles to the three restated by Guillaume here, and excluding those which are given later, pp. 170–1, whose contemporary or patristic origin is not clear.

¹⁵ Lille, Alain de, De fide catholtca contra haereticos, I, iii, PL 210, col. 309.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Moneta, , Adversus Catharos, I, viii, 1, p. 83aGoogle Scholar. In Peter of Tarentaise, cited in n. 5 above: ‘Cuius causa est inuariabilis, ipsum est inuariabile; quia idem similiter se babens natum est omnino faceré idem, ut dicitur in lib. de gen. & corrup. Ergo, cum Deus sit causa inuariabilis, ab ipso non sunt variabilis’

¹⁷ Summa aurea, II, viii, i, SpUilegium Bonaventurianum, 17, part 1, p. 168.

¹⁸ Moneta, , Adversus Catharos, I, I, 3, p. 23bGoogle Scholar. Compare also Guillaume d’Auvergne’s presentation of ‘Manicbean’ argument against one principle, in his De universo, VIII, Opera omnia, 2 vols (Paris, 1674), I, p. 601: ‘Horum [= reasons] igitur primum est quia ex altero contrariorum non potest esse alterum: malum igitur ex bono esse non potest: erit igitur ex malo.’

¹⁹ Glorieux, , ‘Quoniam homines’, p. 130.Google Scholar

²⁰ In Peter of Tarentaise, cited in n. $ above: ‘Nihil est causa constructiua, & destructiua: ergo oportet poneré duo prima principia, vnum constructionis, alteram destructionis.’

²¹ D’Alverny, , Alain de Lille, p. 158Google Scholar, observed an overlap.

²² On the date of the Summa aurea, see Ribailler’s, J. Introduction Générale to his edition, Spicilegium Bonaventurianum, 20, p. 16Google Scholar; Landgraf, A. M., Introduction a l’histoire de la littérature théologique naissante (Montréal and Paris, 1973), pp. 173–4Google Scholar. See the editors’ comments in Gui de Orchelles, Tractatus de sacramentis, , D. and den Eynde, O. Van, eds (New York, Louvain, and Paderborn, 1953), p. xliGoogle Scholar: the ignoring of important canon-legal material on marriage of 1216–17 suggests a date for Gui’s Tractatus hardly after 1216–17 – and thus not after 1220 – and Guillaume’s use of Gui’s work in the fourth book of the Summa aurea (but not in earlier books) suggests a date for the Summa aurea’s completion a little after 1220, that is to say, between 1222 and 1225. There seems no clear ground for the double chronological slide. On the reasoning of the Van den Eyndes, the fourth book of the Summa aurea, in this picture, could have been undergoing influence from a Gui work composed in 1216–17. Why could it not be as early as 1218?

²³ They are described by Ribailler, , Introduction, pp. 42–184.Google Scholar

²⁴ Ibid., pp. 42, 47, 80–1, 139, 157; see also p. 93, for a Naples copy which was once in Dominican hands.

²⁵ Ibid., pp. 50–2.

²⁶ SOPMA, 3, p. 137.

²⁷ Ibid., p. 330.

²⁸ Moneta, Praefatio, p. 2.

²⁹ Curtius, E. R., European Literature and the Latin Middle Ages, trans. Trask, W. R. (London, Henley, 1953), pp. 83–5Google Scholar. Moneta is being modest about the strength of his counter arguments, not about his knowledge of heretics’ arguments.

³⁰ Paolini, L., ‘Italian Catharism and written culture’, Biller, and Hudson, , eds, Heresy and Literacy, pp. 61–82.Google Scholar

³¹ Moneta, I, vii, 2, p. 79b; see further Paolini, ‘Italian Catharism’, p. 101.

³² On his life, see Ribailler, , Introduction, pp. 1–5.Google Scholar

³³ Quoted by Ribailler, , Introduction, p. 4Google Scholar: ‘ut referebantur mihi sacerdotes de episcopatu Altissiodorensi … quando disputebat Parisius, nullus disputebat melius eo.’

³⁴ On the chronicle, which is cited below, see Delisle, L., ‘Chronique de Robert de Saint – Marien d’Auxerre’, Histoire littéraire Je France, 32 (1898), pp. 503–35.Google Scholar

³⁵ Chénon, E., ‘L’Hérésie à La Charité-sur-Loire et les débuts de l’inquisition monastique dans la France du Nord au XlIIe siècle’, Nouvelle Reme Historique de Droit Français et Étranger, 41 (1917), pp. 299–345Google Scholar. See also Haskins, C H., ‘Robert le Bougre and the beginnings of Inquisition in Northern France’, originally published in the AHR in 1902, but cited here from the updated version in his Studies in Medieval Culture (Cambridge, MA, 1929), pp. 193–244Google Scholar (204-7), and Duvernoy, , Histoire, pp. 141–3.Google Scholar

³⁶ Duru, L. M., Bibliothèque historique de l’Yonne, 2 vols (Auxerre, Paris, 1850-63), r, p. 43 rGoogle Scholar; Bouchard, C. B., Spirituality and Administration. The Role of the Bishop in Twelfth-Century Auxerre (Cambridge, MA, 1979), pp. 99, 103–5.Google Scholar

³⁷ Duru, , Bibliothèque, 1, p. 445Google Scholar; Robert of Auxerrre, Chronicon, 1201, MGH.SS, 26, p. 260.

³⁸ Duvernoy, , Histoire, pp. 143–4.Google Scholar

³⁹ Wilmart, A., ‘Une lettre sur les cathares du Nivernais (V.1221)’, Revue Bénédictine, 47 (1935). pp. 72–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴⁰ Summa aurea, III, xliii, 2, Spicilegium Bonaventurianum, 18b, p. 825: ‘perfectus hereticus paratus est ad omnia pati pro fide falsa.’

⁴¹ Nequam, Alexander, Speculum speculationum,> IV, xx, 4+IV,+xx,+4>Google Scholar, ed. Thompson, R., ABMA, 11 (1988), p. 445Google Scholar: ‘patiuntur Cathari quoslibet cruciatus’; Thompson comments on the work’s influence on Guillaume d’Auxerre, p. xviii. See similar comment by Guillaume d’Auvergne, below and note 97.

⁴² Translation from Summa aurea, II, viii, 1, Spicilegium Bonaventurianum, 17, part 1, p. 173.

⁴³ Lacombe, G., La Vie et les oeuvres de Prévostin (Le Saulchoir, Kain, 1927), pp. 11–12Google Scholar; an extract from the sermon is given in p. 11, n. 4.

⁴⁴ This attribution, stated by Lacombe (Prévostin, p. 134), is fragile; see Garvin, J. N. and Corbett, J. A., eds, The Summa contra haereticos ascribed to Praepositnus of Cremona (Notre Dame, IN, 1958), pp. xiii-xiv and xxvii, n. 26Google Scholar (observing Lacombe’s error in ascribing to one of the manuscripts a title including Prevostin’s name). If the attribution goes, so also goes Lacombe’s argument (Prévostin, pp. 11–12) against years in the Rhineland providing Prévostin with his knowledge of Cathars.

⁴⁵ Aristotle, , De generatione et corruptions Translatio vetus, ed. Judycka, J., AL, 9, i (1986), pp. 74Google Scholar (lines 19–20) and 75 (lines 8–9).

⁴⁶ ALCodices. Pars Posterior (1955), p. 788; Minio-Paluello, L., Opuscula. The Latin Aristotle (Amsterdam, 1972), pp. 61, 71–83Google Scholar passim, and ‘Aristotle: tradition and influence’, Gillispie, C. C., ed., Dictionary of Scientific Biography, 16 vols (New York, 1970-80), 1, p. 271Google Scholar; De generatione, ed. Judycka, pp. xxxiv-xxxviii.

⁴⁷ AL. Codices. Pars Prior (1939), nos. 340 and 408, pp. 398–9 and 437–8.

⁴⁸ Minio-Paluello, , Opuscula, pp. 180, 191, 216–18.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Jacquart, D., ‘Aristotelcan thought in Salerno’, in Dronke, P., ed., A History of Twelfth- Century Philosophy (Cambridge, 1988), pp. 417–23, 426.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ De generations ed. Judycka, ppjdvii-liv, provides a survey of early users.

⁵¹ Haskins, C. H., Studies in the History of Medieval Science, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, MA, 1927), P. 373.Google Scholar

⁵² Hunt, R. W., The Schools and the Cloister. The Life and Writings of Alexander Nequam (1157-1217), revised Gibson, M (Oxford, 1984), p. 30.Google Scholar

⁵³ John Blund, De anima, xxi, ed. Callus, D. A. and Hunt, R. W., ABMA, 2 (1970), p. 77, no. 287.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ See n. 67 below.

⁵⁵ Note a parallel, Minio-Paluello’s question about southern Italian monasteries as possible sources for the new translations gathered in Mont-Saint-Michel, Opuscula, p. 180.

⁵⁶ Chenu, M.-D., La Théologie au douzième siècle (Paris, 1957), p. 151.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ D’Alverny, , Alain de Lille, pp. 66–8Google Scholar; LefT, , Medieval Thought, pp. 132–3.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Edited by Hiring, N. M., ‘Magister Alanus de Insulis. Regulae caelestis iuris’, AHDLMA, an. $6 (1981), 48 (1982), pp. 97–226.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Häring, , ‘Regulae’, p. 121.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Ibid., p. 123.

⁶¹ On these florilegio in general, see the chapter ‘Flores et Auctoritates. Aristotelische Exzerptenliteratur’ in Grabmann, M., Methoden und Hilfsmittel des Aristotelesstudiums im Mittelalter, Sitzungsberichte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Phil.-Hist. Abt., Heft 5 (1939), pp- 156–88.Google Scholar

⁶² Hamesse, J., Les Auctoritates Aristotelis. Un florilège médiéval. Étude historique et édition critique (Louvain and Paris, 1974), p. 170, no. 42.Google Scholar

⁶³ Auctoritates Aristotelis, p. 231, no. 5; Livre des deux principes, II, 16–18, ed. Thouzellier, C., SC, 198 (Paris, 1973), p. 166.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Livre des deux principes, LXIII, 104–6, p. 398; see also p. 47 n. 1, and comment in Auctoritates Aristotelis, pp. 13–14, on imprecision in citation of Aristotle.

⁶⁵ Biller, and Hudson, , eds, Heresy and Literacy, pp. 38–60.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ An important exception is Duvernoy, Histoire, pp. 107–50.

⁶⁷ ‘Postea Francigene, qui iverant Constantinopolim, redierunt ad propria et predicaver unt, et multiplican constituerunt episcopum Francie Item provinciales, audientes predicacionem eorum et seducti ab illis de Francia… Post longum tempus quidam notarius de Francia venit in Lombardiam … Rocavien — et est locus apud Cuneum -, ubi stabant cathari qui vénérant de Francia ad habitandum ibi. Et episcopus hereticorum non erat ibi, sed erat Neapoli’: Anselm, Tractatus, p. 308.

⁶⁸ Sacconi, p. 50: ‘Ecclesia Francie morantur Verona et in Lombardia, et sunt circiter CL.’

⁶⁹ Haskins, , ‘Inquisition in Northern France’, pp. 196–7.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ See n. 35 above. Despy, B. has re-examined the career of Robert le Bougre in his ‘Les Débuts de l’Inquisition dans les anciens Pays-Bas au XIHe siècle’, in Cambier, G., ed., Problèmes d’histoire de christianisme. Hommage à Jean Hadot (Brussels, 1980), pp. 71–104Google Scholar, and he has expressed scepticism about the Catharism and heresy of those persecuted as heretics in the north, in his ‘Hérétiques ou anticléricaux? Les “cathares” dans nos régions avants 1300’, in Aspects de l’anticléricalisme du moyen age à nos jours. Hommage à Robert Joly, Problèmes d’histoire du christianisme, 18 (Brussels, 1988), pp. 23–33.

⁷¹ Delmaire, B., ‘Un Sermon arrageois inédit sur les “Bougres” du Nord de la France (vers 1200)’, Heresis, 17 (1991), pp. 1–15.Google Scholar

⁷² Borst, , Kalharer, p. 231.Google Scholar

⁷³ Duvernoy, , Histoire, p. 147.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Hamilton, B., The Cathar Council of Saint-Félix Reconsidered’, AFP, 48 (1978), pp. 23–53.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Hamilton, , ‘Saint-Félix’, p. 33.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ This is the charge of Béthune, Evrard de, Liber antihaeresis, VII, XX, XXIIGoogle Scholar, ed. Gretser, J. and cited here from the reprint in la Bignè, M. de, Bibliotheca patrum et veterum auctorum ecclesiasticorum, 4, part 1 (Paris [1624], cols 1115, 1153, 1157–60Google Scholar. See note 92 below.

⁷⁷ Chronicon [1198], MGH.SS, XXVI, p. 258.

⁷⁸ Chénon, , ‘Charité-sur-Loire’, p. 330Google Scholar,.a 1.

⁷⁹ William of Newburgh, Historia rerum Anglicarum, in Councils and Synods with other Documents Relating to the English Church, I, A.D. 871–1204, ed. Whitelock, D., Brett, M., and Brooke, C. N. L., 2 parts (Oxford, 1981), part 2, p. 924Google Scholar. This report is examined in my William of Newburgh and the Cathar mission to England’, forthcoming in Wood, D., ed., Life and Thought in the Northern Church, ciioo-ayoo. Essays in Honour of Claire Cross.Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Fredericq, P., Corpus documentorum inquisitionis haereticae pravitatis Neerlandicae, 5 vols (Ghent, 1889-1906), 1, p. 48, no. 48.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Paris, Matthew, CM [1238], 3, p. 520Google Scholar. See Despy, , ‘Débuts de l’Inquisition’, p. 78 n. 4Google Scholar for higher praise of Robert, described as vir doctissimus, from another contemporary, and see p. 79 for reserve about Robert as a former Cathar.

⁸² Sermones XII contra Catharos, V, xii, PL 195, cols 34–5; Speculum speculationum, Hl.lxii, 1, p. 327.

⁸³ Sermo IX, x, col. 60: ‘qui antiquorum Patrum scripta hoc attestari aestimatis.’

⁸⁴ Sermones, preface, cols 13–14.

⁸⁵ Sermo XI, viii, col. 88.

⁸⁶ The following is based on the article on Eckbert in Die deutsche Literatur des Mittelalters. Verfasserlexikon, 2 (Berlin and New York, 1980), pp. 435–40.

⁸⁷ An example of a categorical statement of Alain’s contact with Cathars in Languedoc, for which there is no direct evidence, is Thouzellier, C., Catharisme et vaUéisme en Languedoc à la fin du XUe et au début du XHIe siècle (Paris, 1965), p. 82.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ d’Alverny, M.-T., ‘Maitre Alain – “NOVA ET VETERA’“, Gandillac, M. de and Jeauneau, E., eds, Entretiens sur la renaissance du 12e siècle (Paris and The Hague, 1968), pp. 118–19.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Glorieux, , ‘Quoniam homines’, p. 116.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ See also d’Alverny, , Alain de Lille, p. 157 n. 6Google Scholar, for the suggestion of use of Carolingian material in Alain’s definition of dualism; in fact the parallel is not close.

⁹¹ Glorieux, , ‘Quoniam homines’, p. 130.Google Scholar

⁹² Ibid., p. 129; see also his reference to contemporary heretics condemning marriage, p. 130.

⁹³ On Évrard see Lohmeyer, K., ‘Ebrard von Béthune. Eine Untersuchung über den Verfasser des Graecismus und Laborintus’, Ronunische Forschungen, 11 (1901), pp. 412–30Google Scholar, and on Gretser’s edition of the Liber antihaeresis, Thouzellier, C., Hérésie et hérétiques: vaudois, cathares, patarins, albigeois (Rome, 1969), pp. 44–7Google Scholar. In his ‘“Contra Judaeos” méridionaux au début du XlIIe siècle. Alain de Lille, Evrard de Béthune, Guillaume de Bourges’, CaF, 12 (1977), pp. 269–93 (^at pp. 274–82), M.-H. Vicaire tried unconvincingly to pull this work towards southern France.

⁹⁴ Lohmeyer, , “Ebrard’, p. 416.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Speculum speculationum, IV, xx, 4, p. 445.

⁹⁶ Ibid., prologue, p. 5: ‘Scribere enim me compellit uetus error Manicheorum, proh dolor diebus nostris innouatus.’

⁹⁷ Cronica maiorum et vicecomitum Londoniarum, ed. Stapleton, T., Camden Society, 34 (1846), p. 3Google Scholar; MGH.SS, 27 (1885), p. 357.

⁹⁸ Hunt, Nequam, p. 4.

⁹⁹ De universo, I, ii, and De Legibus, xxi, Opera omnia, 2 vols (Paris, 1674), 1, pp. 594 and 57; compare Nequam and Guillaume d’Auxerre on Cathars and execution, above and n. 41.

¹⁰⁰ Hasldns, , ‘Inquisition’, p. 230.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ Lerner, R. E., “The Heresy’ of the Tree Spirit” in the Later Middle Ages (Berkeley, Los Angeles and London, 1972), p. 22.Google Scholar

¹⁰² Haskins, , ‘Inquisition’, p. 237, n. 4.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ Longère, J., Oeuvres oratoires des maîtres parisiens au Xlle siècle. Étude historique et doctrinale, 2 vols (Paris, 1983), 2, pp. 420–8.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ Baldwin, J. W., Masters, Princes and Merchants. The Social Views of Peter the Chanter and his Circle, 2 vols (Princeton, NJ, 1970), 1, pp. 189–90, 321–2, 2, pp. 128, 216Google Scholar. Cathar views on sex and marriage also attracted comments from the Chanter and Robert of Courson which Baldwin, John cites in his The Language of Sex. Five Voices from Northern France around 1200 (Chicago, IL, 1994), pp. 4 (and 271 n. 10), 178, 244.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ Sermo V, vii, col. 31: Rustici, redite ad eumdem librum.’

¹⁰⁶ Sermo XII, I, col. 94: “Evangelia legatis et sciatis, sicut dicitis.’

¹⁰⁷ Sermo XI, v, col. 86: ‘Si estis eruditi de Scripturis Sanctis, ut vobis videtur, et vos jactitare soletis.’

¹⁰⁸ Sermones, preface, cols 13–1-4.

¹⁰⁹ Liber antihaeresis, IX, col. 1128. “0 Ibid. Ill, col. 1091.

¹¹¹ Ibid., IV, VIII, Cols1097, 1121.

¹¹² Ibid., VIII, col. 1121. On Perorine, see Despy, , ‘Débuts de l’Inquisition’, pp. 97–8.Google Scholar

¹¹³ Speculum speculationum, I, i, 1, p. 9.

¹¹⁴ Ibid., I, ii, 6, p. 21.

¹¹⁵ Ibid., Prologue, p. 5.

¹¹⁶ Dr D. Howlett has kindly discussed with me Nequam’s use of litterator, pointing out that Nequam tends to be consistent, and that in two other uses ditterator Nequam’s sense is ‘literalist’.

¹¹⁷ In die account of Hugh of Noyers’ hammering of the heretics of La Charité: ‘alii perrinatiores, in salutis sue dispendium, in Ytaliam vel ad Albigenses, ad sui erroris complices confugerunt’, Duru, , Bibliothèque historique de l’Yonne, i, p. 43 r.Google Scholar

^1.8 Chénon, , ‘Charité-sur-Loire’, p. 336, note 3.Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ Peter of Vaux-de-Cernay, , Historia albigensis [1206], ed. Guébin, P. and Lyon, E., 3 vols (Paris, 1926-39), 1, pp. 25–26Google Scholar: ‘gloriabantur se habuissc de Francia (ubi esse dinoscitur fons scientie et religionis Christiane) sue crcdulitatis socium, sue nequitie defensorem.’

¹²⁰ The authenticity of the letter is discussed in Segl, P., Ketzer in Osterreich. Untersuchungenüber Häresie und Inquisition im Herzogtum Österreich im 13. und heginnenden 14. Jahrhundert (Paderborn, Munich, Vienna, and Zurich, 1984), pp. 76–11Google Scholar. Helping to anchor Ivo’s experience is his mention of Peter Gallus, bishop of the Cathar church of Vicenza c.1210-35.

¹²¹ Quoted by Paolini, , in Biller, and Hudson, , eds, Heresy and Literacy, p. 96Google Scholar, from Matthew Paris’s copy of Ivo’s letter.

¹²² Borst, , Katharer, appendix 3, especially pp. 265–79.Google Scholar

¹²³ See n. 10 above.

¹²⁴ See n. 11 above.

¹²⁵ See n. 19 above.

¹²⁶ See n. 13 above.

¹²⁷ See n. 12 above.

¹²⁸ See n. 14 above.

¹²⁹ See n. 19 above.

¹³⁰ See n. 20 above.

¹³¹ See n. 15 above.

¹³² See n. 16 above.