No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 March 2016
Maximus sermocinator verbi Dei is the description of pope Clement VI, formerly Pierre Roger, given by a fourteenth-century French chronicler. Others of the pope’s compatriots were equally fulsome in their adulation. An Italian chronicler, perhaps an ex-student at the university of Paris, where Pierre Roger had been a master in theology, records:
. . . gratissimus fuit sermocinator. Quum cathedram concionaturus aut disputaturus ascendebat, tota Parisiorum Civitas, ut eum audiret, accurrebat. Proh quam eleganter sermocinabatur!
In Prague, Clement’s ex-pupil, the emperor Charles IV, remembered the grace with which he had been infused through listening to one of his master’s sermons over twenty years before. Even the English joined this chorus of praise. Thomas Walsingham paid tribute to Clement as a man of singular culture, while Walter Burley lauded his teaching skill, his oratory, and his legendary memory. By the early fifteenth century Clement’s sermons were regarded as models. Several of them appear, abbreviated and anonymous, as part of a treatise on preaching by Paul Koëlner, canon of Ratisbon, written some time before 1420.
I should like to thank Dr Margaret Harvey for discussing this paper with me in its early stages, and Dr Michael Wilks for his kindness in reading the draft and for much help and encouragement. I also thank the university of East Anglia for generous grants towards microfilms.
2 Aymeric dePeyraco, Chronicon: cited in Baluze, S., Vitae Paparum Avenionensium, ed Mollat, G., II (Paris 1927) p 422.Google Scholar
3 Historiae Romanae Fragmenta, ed Muratorius, L.A., Antiquitates Italicae Medii Aevi, III (Milan 1740) cap xii, p 344.Google Scholar
4 Vita Karoli Quarti Itnperatoris ab ipso Karolo conscripta, ed Böhmer, J.F., Fontes Rerum Germanicarum, I (Stuggart 1843) p 235 Google Scholar: ‘Piacuit autem mieni predicti abbatis facundia seu eloquencia in eodem sermone, ut tantam contemplacionem haberem in devotione ipsum audiens et intuens, quod intra me cepi cogitare dicens: Quid est quod tanta grada michi infunditur ex hornine isto? Cepique demum sui noticiam, qui ad me multum caritative ac paterne confovebat, de sacra scriptura me sepius informando’.
5 Walsingham, Thomas, Historia Anglicana, ed Riley, H.T., RS 28, I, i (London 1863) p 254.Google Scholar
6 Burley, Walter, Epistola dedicatoria ad Commentarium in VIH libros Politicorum Aristotelu, ed Maier, A., ‘Zu Walter Burleys Politik-Kommentar’, Ausgehendes Mittelalter gesammelte] A[ufsätze zur] G[eistesgeschichte des 14 Jahrhunderts], I (Rome 1964) pp 95, 96.Google Scholar
7 ‘Oxford, Bodleian library, MS Laud Misc 432, fols 12or-263v. Part of the treatise appears also in Munich MSS lat. 19539, fois 45r-9v and 13431, fols Ir-6r; Trêves MS 327, fols 95Г-ЮІГ, and Graz MS Univ. 348, fols 80Г-7Г. All the manuscripts are fifteenth century, Graz MS Univ. 348 being the earliest, written C1420. Munich 19539 is the only one to acknowledge Clement VI: See Charland, Th.-M., ‘Artes Praedicandi’. Contribution à l’histoire de la rhétorique au Moyen Age (Paris/Ottawa 1936) p 74.Google Scholar
8 Schneyer, J.B., Repertorium der lateinischen Sermones des Mittelalters, pt iv (Münster, Westfalen 1972) pp 757-69.Google Scholar On Clement’s sermons in general see Mollat, [G.], ‘L’oeuvre oratoire [de Clément VI]’, Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Age, III (Paris 1928) pp 239-74Google Scholar; Schmitz, P., ‘Les sermons et discours de Clément VI’, RB, xli (1929) pp 15–34 Google Scholar; Maier, [A.], ‘Der Literarische [nachlass des Petrus Rogerii (Clemens VI) in der Borghesiana’], AAG II (Rome 1967) pp 255–315, 503-17.Google Scholar
9 Vatican MS Borghese 247. For description see Maier, , ‘Der Literarische’, pp 308-13Google Scholar and her Codices Burghesiani Bibliothecae Vaticanae, Studie Testi, 170 (Rome 1952) pp 295-301.
10 [Paris, Bibliothèque] St G[eneviève MS] 240, fol 162r: ‘. . . unde videtur michi quod inter cetera eloquium dicitur habere pulchritudinem ex quattuor, secun- dum similitudinem pulchritudinis corporalis: primo quando habet veritateni existentie, secundo quando habet sublimitatem eminentie, tercio quando habet virtuositem efficacie, quarto quando habet claritatem intelligentie. Eloquium enim merito dicitur pulchrum.’
11 St G 240, fol 162v: ‘Falsitas autem vilitas, vanitas et obscuritas debent esse extranea a sermone. Et ideo quando remota sunt, sermo pulcher est’.
12 St G 240, fol 162v: ‘Et quia hodie prohdolor in multis verbis prelatorum etiam magnorum ista quattuor vel eorum alterum se immiscent, quia frequenter in ore eorum invenitur potius falsitas quam veritas, vilitas quam honestas, vanitas quam utilitas, obscuritas quam claritas. Idcirco eorum verba turpitudinem potius quam pulchritudinem habent’.
13 Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale MS nouvelle acquisition latin 2627: Bibliothèque de l’Ecole des Chartes, 124 (1966) pp 153-4Google Scholar: ‘Incipit liber primus exceptionum collectarum de diversis opusculis b. Bernhardi .. . editus ab episcopo Petro Senonensi [Clemens VI, papa]’.
14 Delisle, L., Inventaire des Manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Nationale: Fonds de Cluny (Paris 1884) Appendix V, p 387 Google Scholar: ‘Bartholomei de Urbino, compilatio ex dictis sancti Ambrosii, facta jussu de mentis VI, ordine alphabetico, usque ad luterani G inclusive’.
15 Mollat, ‘L’oeuvre oratoire’, p 268.
16 For conflicting interpretations see Léonard, E. G., La Jeunesse de Jeanne Ier, reine de Naples, comtesse de Provence (Paris 1932) I, p 257.Google Scholar
17 St G 240, fol 363V: ‘Sed videtur michi quod licet multi legantur in scriptura prodicionaliter interfecti, tamen nullius mors, nullius occisio fuit ita similis morti Christi sicut mors nostri Andree. ... Primo quidem ratione patientis passus est enim Christus. Passus est noster Andreas, qui habent similitudinem quo ad tria. Primo quo ad teneritudinem complexionis. Uterque enim in etate tenera, sed Andreas in magis tenera....Tercio quantum ad celsitudinem domina-tionis. Uterque enim Rex, et uterque a suo Populo interfectus. Sed videtur prima facie quod etiam in hoc homicide Regis Andree gravius peccaverunt. Iudei enim licet Christus esset Rex verus, eorum tamen eum non cognoscebant in regem’.
18 St G 240, fols 403v-8r.
19 Mollat, ‘L’oeuvre oratoire’, pp 270-1.
20 St G 240, fols 336V-43V.
21 St G 240, fol 337v: ‘Secundo dico quod hic concurrit fidei nostri imperii dilatatio copiosa vel gloriosa’.
22 St G 240, fol 148V: ‘Roma est propria sedes summi pontificis et successoris Petri. Unde vocatur Romanus pontifex, Romanus episcopus’.
23 St G 240, fol 148V: ‘Sed arguitur contra, videtur quod Roma non sit propria sedes papae. Probatur sic: sponsus universalis Ecclesie non habet propriam sedem; sed papa est sponsus universalis Ecclesie; ergo non habet propriam sedem. Et sic secundum istum modum Roma non est sua propria sedes’.
24 For examples see Wilks, M.J., The Problem of Sovereignty in the Later Middle Ages (Cambridge 1963) pp 401–7.Google Scholar
25 St G 240, fol 149V: ‘Ergo quamvis sponsus sponsam diligat debet tarnen cum oportunitas exigit, dimissa presentia sponsa, ad alia transferre. Et de hoc habemus figurum Gen xxxo quod quamvis Patriarcha Jacob diligeret Rachelem, velut sponsam valde dilectam formosam et valde pulchram, oportuit tamen ipsum de beneplacito Rachelis descendere ad Lyam . ..’.
26 St G 24.0, fol 150г: ‘Item tempestate in mari existente solus Petrus exivit ad fluctuaciones maris. Mt. xiiiio; [22-9]. Alii discipuli remanserunt in navi, ad denotandum quod Romanus pontifex, qui stat in loco beati Petri, debet ad diversas partes accedere, ut possit sibi commissarum omnium [sic] sedare et tollere tempestates. Alii vero prelati remanent velut in navi in propriis ecclesiis, quibus sunt ordinati et deputati’. The latin appears to be corrupt at this point, but a comparison with a later recension of the sermon in Cambridge, Peterhouse MS 265, fols i66r-73v at fols 169r/v reveals identical wording.
27 MGH Const, VIII, no 100, pp 143-63.
28 Ibid pp 151-2.
29 Finke, [H.], [Acta Concila Constanciensis], II (Münster 1923)Google Scholar. The standard work on preaching at Constance is Arendt, P., Die Predigten des Konstanzer Konzils (Freiburg im Breisgau 1933).Google Scholar
30 Finke, pp 370-1. The incipits of the two sermons are: ‘Filius noster iste pro-tervus et contumax’, Deut. 21: 18-19, and ‘Ortus est sol’, Ps 103:22.
31 Schneyer, [J.B.], ‘Konstanzer Konzilspredigten. [Eine Ergänzung zu H. Finke’s Sermones - und Handschriftenlisten]’, Zeitschrift für die] G[eschichte des] 0 [berrheins], 113 (Karlsruhe 1965) pp 361-88Google Scholar; ‘Konstanzer Konzilspredigten: Texte’, ZCO 118 (1970) p 99 Google Scholar, and ‘Neuaufgefundene Konstanzer Konzilspredigten’, Annuarium Históriáé Conciliorum II (Amsterdam 1970) pp 66–77.Google Scholar
32 Schneyer, , ‘Konstanzer Konzilspredigten: Texte’, pp 100–9 Google Scholar, from Stift St Paul (Lavant) MS pap. 29 fols 88v-96r. The best manuscript version is St G 240, fols 328V-34T. The discourse has been printed several times, the best edition being de Maillane, Durand, Les Liberiez de l’Eglise Gallicane prouvées et com mentées, III (Paris/Lyons 1771) pp 460-79.Google Scholar
33 Klosterneuburg Stiftsbibliothek MS 82.
34 Vidal, [J. M.], [‘Un recueil manuscrit de sermons prononcés aux Conciles de Constance et de Bâle’], RHE, 10 (1909) pp 493–520 Google Scholar. The number of the manu script is not given.
35 Vidal p 494.
36 St G 240 and Klosterneuburg Stiftsbibliothek 204.
37 Walch, [C.W.F.], Monimenta [Medii Aevi ex bibliotheca Regia Hanouerana], I, fase 3 (Göttingen 1759) pp 29–57;Google Scholar fase 4 (Göttingen 1760) pp 47-71.
38 Mansi 28, cols 906-7.
39 Schneyer, ‘Konstanzer Konzilspredigten: Texte’.
40 The manuscripts are: Berlin, Staatsbibliothek, Lat 632, fols 46 et seq (See Finke p 480). Erlangen, Universitätsbibliothek 534 fols 194r-7V; 203r-6v; 257r-60r. Hanover MS used by Walch, Monimenta, fase 3, pp 29-57; fasc 4 PP 47-71. Karlsruhe: Reichenau 23, fols 146V-53V. Klosterneuburg, Stiftsbibliothek 82, fols 91V-108V; 112r-18r; 130r-3r. Krems, fols 119r-42r; 147r-54v; 168v-72r (See Vidal). Kremsmünster 4, fols 216v-28v. Lübeck, Stadtbibliothek theol 59, fols 181 et seq. Nürnberg, Stadtbibliothek, Solg 48.2, fols 180r-9r. St Paul (Lavant) pap 29, fols 88r-130v; 206r-302r. St Paul (Lavant) pap 31 fols 300r-15r. Stettin, Mariengymnasium 33, fols 66 et seq (See Finke pp 368, 371). Stuttgart, Württembergischen Landesbibliothek, HB I 116, fols 100V-4X. Vienna, Pal. 4958, fols 345r-50v.
41 Finke p 480. Incipit: ‘Hic est discipulus ille,’John 21:24. The sermon appears in Klosterneuburg 82, fols 130r-3r and in this version corresponds with the wording of Klosterneuburg 204, fols 62v-8v.
42 Finke p 482. Incipit: ‘Reges eorum ministrabunt tibi,’ Is. 60, 10. It is edited by Walch, Monimenta fase 4, pp 47-71, and in this version agrees with Kloster- neuburg 204, fols 165r-72r.
43 Vidal p 500, no 28. Incipit: ‘Sufficiat nobis quia omnis multitudino sanctorum est et cum ipsis est Dominus,’ Num. 16:3. The sermon appears in Klosterneuburg 82, fols 96v-102r, the wording of which agrees with that of St G 240, fols 41V-9V.
44 Walch, Monimenta, fase 3, pp. 29-57. Incipit: ‘Talis decebat ut esset nobis Pontifex,’ Heb. 7:26. The printed edition corresponds with St G 240, fols 284V-90V.
45 St G 240, fols 403v-8r. Incipit: ‘Leonem et ursum interfeci,’ 1 Kings, 17, 36, fols 244V-7V. Incipit: ‘Tempus tribulationis est Iacob et ex ipso salvabitur,’ Jer. 30, 7.
46 St Paul (Lavant) 29, fols 262r-72r; Klosterneuburg 82, fols 91V-6V; Krems, fols 119r-26r.
47 See n 45 above.
48 Klosterneuburg 82, fols 91 v; 93V.
49 See n 32 above.
50 St G 240, fols 334v-6r. Incipit: ‘Ortus est sol’, Ps 103:22.
51 Mansi 28, cols 906-7.
52 Ibid col 907.
53 Ibid col 907; Finke p 371.
54 Cerretanus, Liber gestorum, ed Finke, II, p. 298.
55 St Paul (Lavant) 31, fols 300r-15r; Kremsmünster 4, fols 216v-28v.
56 Fulastre, , Gesta Concila Constantiensis, ed Finke, , II, p 163.Google Scholar
57 Compare ibid with Clement, VI, MGH Const, viii, no 100, p 163 Google Scholar. On the history of the papai approval of imperial candidates see Feine, E., ‘Die Approbation der Luxemburgischen Kaiser in ihren Rechtsformen an der Kurie’, ZSR, KA 27 (1938) pp 364-97.Google Scholar
Please note a has been issued for this article.