¹ The author wishes to thank all those who made this study possible, particularly the American Philosophical Society in Philadelphia for a travel grant to Europe in the summer of 1955. For invaluable paleographic assistance he is indebted to Dott. Augusto Campana of the Biblioteca Vaticana. An expression of thanks is also due his colleagues at Quincy College, Hug, Pacific L. O.F.M. and Hermann, Victor E. O.F.M., for valuable suggestions and assistance during the course of the study. — For Alberic and the older bibliography there cited, see Homer Haskins, Charles, ‘Albericus Casinensis,’ Casinensia 1 (Monte Cassino 1929) 115–124 (= Casinensia); Willard, H. M. ‘The Use of the Classics in the Flores rhetorici of Alberic of Monte Cassino,’ Anniversary Essays… Charles Homer Haskins (Boston 1929) 351–363 (= Anniversary Essays); Manitius, M. Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters III (Munich 1931) 303–305; Inguanez, M. ‘Inni inediti di Alberico ed il codice cassinese 199,’ Bullettino dell’ Istituto storico italiano 47 (1932) 191–198 (= Inni inediti); F.J.E. Raby, History of Secular Latin Poetry in the Middle Ages I (Oxford 1934) 376–377; Klewitz, H. W. ‘Zum Leben und Werk Alberichs von Monte Cassino,’ Historische Vierteljahrschrift 29 (1935) 371–374 (= Leben und Werk); Inguanez, M. and Willard, H. M. Alberici casinensis Flores rhetorici (Miscellanea Cassinese 14; Monte Cassino 1938) (= Flores rhetorici); Anseimo Lentini, ‘L'omilia e la vita di s. Scolastica di Alberico cassinese,’ Benedictina 3 (1949) 217–238 (= Scolastica); Lentini, A. ‘La vita s. Dominici di Alberico cassinese,’ Benedictina 5 (1951) 47–77; Lentini, A. ‘Note su Alberico cassinese, maestro di retorica,’ Studi medievali 18 (Turin 1952) 121–137; Lentini, A. ‘Sulla Passio s. Modesti di Alberico cassinese,’ Benedictina 6 (1952) 231–235; Lentini, A., ‘Alberico di Monte Cassino nel quadro della riforma gregoriana,’ Studi gregoriani IV (Rome 1952) 55–109 (= Studi gregoriani IV).Google Scholar

² Chronica monasterii casinensis (ed. Wattenbach, W., MGH Scriptores 7.728; also PL 173.766B) (= Chron. Cas.)Google Scholar

³ De viris illustribus casinensis coenobii 21 (PL 173.1032).Google Scholar

⁴ This can be argued from the letter of St. Peter Damian, addressed to Alberic, Opusc. 37² (PL 145.632B). While explaining to Alberic the intricacies involved in dating the death of Christ, Damian stated: ‘Ita per omnia, et quingentesimo trigesimo tertio anno postmodum contigit, et hoc anno, qui millesimus sexagesimus quintus est, similiter venit.’ Cf. also Lentini, Studi gregoriani IV 63–65; for the earlier dating, cf. infra, n. 12. that same period launched his literary career in the stimulating atmosphere of the ‘Desiderian renaissance.’⁵ Google Scholar

⁵ For an excellent picture of Monte Cassino in the days of the abbot Desiderius (1058–1087), cf. Bloch, H., ‘Monte Cassino, Byzantium, and the West in the Earlier Middle Ages,’ Dumbarton Oaks Papers 3 (1946) 163–224 (= DOP); cf. also Lentini, Studi gregoriani IV 56–63.Google Scholar

⁶ Klewitz, , Leben und Werk 371–374. Cf. also Lentini, Passio s. Modesti 231–235.Google Scholar

⁷ Cf. Erdmann, C., Neues Archiv 50 (1935) 769–770. Erdmann disagrees with Klewitz and, because of its relation to the word clientulus, would rather translate magister as lord or patron. It is Erdmann again who suggests Peter Damian as Alberic's teacher, following the clue of Alberic's use of Peter Damian's exemplary style. On which, cf. Rockinger, L., ‘Briefsteller und Formelbücher des 11. bis 14. Jahrhunderts,’ Quellen und Erörterungen zur bayerischen und deutschen Geschichte 9 (1863–1864) xxvi-xxvii, xxxii-xxxiii, 1–46, 54. Rockinger's edition of the Breviarium de dictamine is sadly incomplete. In the Breviarium V (Rockinger, Briefsteller 33), however, Alberic says: ‘Uerba scematica id est figuratiua et ornata ad laudem uel ad uituperationem seu persone seu uirtutis uel uicii comodissime aptantur.’ Then, on the statement of Rockinger, and not edited in his text, follow several examples of praise and vituperation; and for the latter, Alberic cites Peter Damian on meretrices. Cf. also infra, n. 113.Google Scholar

⁸ For Damian's relation with Monte Cassino and its famous abbot, cf. Fridolin Dressler, Petrus Damiani Leben und Werk (Studia anselmiana 34; Rome 1954) 71–74; Blum, O. J., St. Peter Damian : His Teaching on the Spiritual Life (Washington 1947) 15; Lentini, Studi gregoriani IV 63–65. Damian was elevated to the cardinalate somewhat before Christmas in 1057; Desiderius in March, 1059. Because Damian's entrance into the Sacred College occurred during the pontificate of Stephen IX, the former abbot Frederick of Monte Cassino (1057), who had entered that monastery only two years before (cf. Bloch, DOP 191), it might be conjectured that his relationship with that abbey antedated somewhat the incumbency of Desiderius. Cf., however, Dressler, Petrus Damiani 71, 113; Blum, St. Peter Damian 29.Google Scholar

⁹ John of Lodi, Vita Petri Damiani 20 (PL 144.141 B). Dressler, Petrus Damiani 73, indicates merely the possibility of earlier visits. But the evidence of Chron. Cas. 3.20 (MGH Script. 7.712; PL 173.737–738) obviously refers to a prior visit of Damian, toward the end Alberic of Monte Cassino of the fifth year of Desiderius’ term of office, viz. 1063–1064. Cf. Lentini, Studi gregoriani IV 64; Vita Petri Damiani 19 (PL 144.139 C) n. 58. On Damian's presence at the dedication of the basilica of St. Benedict, Oct. 1, 1071, cf. Bloch, H., DOP 195; Dressler, Petrus Damiani 74.Google Scholar

¹⁰ In all Damian addressed eleven letters to Monte Cassino between 1060 and 1071. Nine of these were sent to Desiderius and two were written to Alberic the Deacon. On which, cf. Dressler, Petrus Damiani 72 n. 308. For a third letter to Alberic, and, therefore, a twelfth communication to his abbey, cf. infra, n. 12. Google Scholar

¹¹ Cf. Borino, G. ‘Per la storia della riforma della Chiesa nel sec. xi,’ Archivio della r. Società romana di storia patria 38 (1915) 60. On the ascetical influence exerted by Peter Damian at Monte Cassino, cf. Blum, St. Peter Damian 15; Chron. Cas. 3.20 (MGH Script. 7.712); Dressler, Petrus Damiani 73.Google Scholar

¹² On the evidence of MS Vat. lat. 4930, s. xi, fols. 26, 29, and 55^v, which contains the Liber testimoniorum veteris et novi testamentorum (the cento of Damian's exegetical writings on the Scriptures), Damian's Opusc. 32: De quadragesima et quadraginta duabus Hebraeorum mansionibus (PL 145.543–560) was addressed to Alberic the Deacon. Written between ca. 1050 and 1057, this letter, therefore, would constitute the earliest of three communications sent by Damian to Alberic. On which, cf. Blum, O. J., ‘Alberic of Monte Cassino and a Letter of St. Peter Damian to Hildebrand,’ Studi gregoriani V (Rome 1956) 291–298.Google Scholar

¹³ Chron. Cas. 3.35 (MGH Script. 7.728); De viris illus. 21 (PL 173.1033). These letters, like most of the other correspondence received by Peter Damian, seem not to have survived.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Opusc. 37 ¹ (PL 145.621–630); Opusc. 37² (PL 145.630–634); Opusc. 32 (PL 145.543–560). Cf. also supra, n. 12.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Lentini, , Studi gregoriani IV 63 and n. 58. This fact seems to strengthen the valuable conjecture made by Erdmann (v. supra, n.7). The salutations used by Damian in addressing Alberic: Alberico venerando fratri and Alberico fratri charissimo, while not particularly distinctive, are yet, especially in the latter case, more familiar than a casual acquaintance might suggest. Lentini (op. cit. 64), however, seems to think that the correspondence between Alberic and Damian might be satisfactorily explained as a natural result of Damian's residence at Monte Cassino in 1064 or 1065.Google Scholar

¹⁶ For a lengthy discussion of the writings of Peter Damian, cf. Manitius, Geschichte III 22, 23, 68–75; Blum, St. Peter Damian 37–71. Particularly valuable for its investigation into the literary, legal, and theological sources of Damian's prose is Dressler's recent study, Petrus Damiani 183–212. For a careful investigation into Damian and canon law, cf. now Joseph, J. Ryan, Saint Peter Damiani and His Canonical Sources (Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies : Studies and Texts 2; Toronto 1956).Google Scholar

¹⁷ Since the days of Constantino Gaetani, the editor of the four-volume Opera omnia of St. Peter Damian (Rome 1606–1640), the question of the poetical corpus of the great reformer of Fonte Avellana has been all but closed. The poems appear in Vol. IV: Preces et carmina (Rome 1640), reprinted in 1642, 1663, 1743, and 1783, and finally included in Migne's Patrologia latina (PL 145.930–986). In 1905, Guido Maria Dreves printed a new edition of the hymns of this collection in the monumental Analecta hymnica 48 (Leipzig) 29–78, augmented and corrected in the same series (AH 51.238–243) three years later by the work of Clemens Blume and Bannister, H. M. Dom André Wilmart (‘Le recueil des poèmes et des prières de saint Pierre Damien,’ Revue bénédictine 41 [1929] 342–357), with characteristic thoroughness discussed the arrangement of Damian's poetry in both the Gaetani and the Dreves-Blume editions, in the light of MS Vat. lat. 3797, discovered by Bannister some twenty years before. Since Wilmart's study, the latest extensive treatments of the poetry of St. Peter Damian appeared in Raby, F. J. E., A History of Christian Latin Poetry (Oxford 1927; 2d ed. 1953) 250–256; Secular Latin Poetry I (Oxford 1934) 369–374; Blum, St. Peter Damian 49–55; Dressler, Petrus Damiani 195–197, 235–236.Google Scholar

¹⁸ For an excerpt edition of the Breviarium, cf. Rockinger, Briefsteller 1–46. A second part of the Breviarium, found in MS Munich lat. 14784, s. xii, fol. 92^v-104^v, entitled Consideratio rithmorum, has never been edited; on which, cf. Inguanez and Willard, Flores rhetorici 11 n. 2; Lentini, Studi gregoriani IV 55. Because of the light which the Consideratio rithmorum can throw on the present study, it will be edited from the Munich MS below, in Appendix A. The Flores rhetorici was edited by Inguanez and Willard, Miscellanea cassinese 14 (Monte Cassino 1938). Google Scholar

¹⁹ Willard, , Anniversary Essays 353.Google Scholar

²⁰ The Homilia is in PL 66.941–950. For a critical edition of the Vita et obitus sanctae Scolasticae, cf. Lentini, Scolastica 231–238. The Vita sancti Dominici de Sora is edited by Lentini, Vitas. Dominici 57–77; also in AS, Jan. 2. 442–446. This life is rather simply written, with a minimum of classical and scriptural allusions. For the Passio sancti Modesti, cf. Analecta Bollandiana 51 (1933) 369ff. The Vita de s. Aspren, ascribed to Alberic chiefly for stylistic reasons, is edited in Lentini, Studi gregoriani IV 89–109. Google Scholar

²¹ Chron. Cas. 3.35 (MGH Script. 7.728; PL 173.766 B); De viris illus. 21 (PL 173.1032).Google Scholar

²² All recent authors state that the impressive group of poetical works ascribed to Alberic has been lost. Thus, Manitius (Geschichte III 305), who still hoped that one or the other poem might be found among the treasures of Monte Cassino. See also Klewitz, Leben und Werk 371; Raby (Christian Latin Poetry 240), who contended that Alberic's metrical verses and rhythms have perished; Lentini (Studi gregoriani IV 55 n. 4), who discussed all the writings of Alberic, save those which have not survived the naufragio of the centuries. Google Scholar

²³ St. Dominic of Sora died on January 22, 1031; cf. Manitius, Geschichte III 304. Google Scholar

²⁴ Cf. Inguanez, , Inni inediti 191–198. These hymns are also reprinted as an appendix to the edition of the Vita s. Dominici by Lentini, 57–77. Inguanez (op. cit. 191) believes that the three hymns he discovered belong to Alberic, even though they are listed neither in the Chron. Cas. 3.35. nor in De viris illus. 21. Since, however, as Inguanez argues, both sources ascribe a Vita s. Dominici to Alberic, these hymns might be considered a part of that citation, and therefore also the work of Alberic. With this ascription Klewitz (Leben und Werk 371) also agrees. On the contrary, it might be argued that in both sources cited above, the chroniclers speak of hymns in honor of St. Scholastica as distinct from a vita and a homilia expressly mentioned.Google Scholar

²⁵ Cf. Inguanez, , Inni inediti 192–193.Google Scholar

²⁶ This poem, edited from MS Vat. lat. 1202, will be found in Appendix B, infra, Google Scholar

^26a Neff, K., Die Gedichte des Paulus Diaconus (Quellen und Untersuchungen zur lateinischen Philologie des Mittelalters, ed. Traube, L., 3.4; Munich 1908) 23–24.Google Scholar

²⁷ E. Dümmler (MGH Poetae latini aevi carolini 1.30) found this elegy to Scholastica in MS Vat. lat. 1202, s. xi, fol. 259^v-272 (formerly a MS of Monte Cassino), where it stands anonymously. He argues against Paul the Deacon as its author, chiefly because no earlier author ascribes it to him. — On this famous Beneventan MS, cf. Archiv 12.224; Lowe, E.A., The Beneventan Script (Oxford 1914) 362; Bertaux, E. L'art dans l'Italie méridionale (Paris 1903) plate 8, where this MS is assigned to about 1070, without explanation. In his earlier work, Lowe (loc. cit.) dates MS Vat. lat. 1202 for the years 1058–1087. But later (Scriptura Beneventana [Oxford 1929] plate 70) he assigns it to 1072–1086. Bloch, H. (DOP 201–207), the latest to discuss the MS, argues for its composition between 1069 or 1070 and October 1, 1071. Bloch conjectures that it may have been presented to Pope Alexander II on the occasion of the dedication of the basilica of St. Benedict. See also Meyvaert, Dom P., ‘Peter the Deacon and the Tomb of Saint Benedict,’ Revue bénédictine 65 (1955) 23–24, where the author agrees with the dating of Bloch. — Following the evidence of Chron Cas. 3.35, Dümmler (toc. cit.) assigns the poem to Alberic, stating that the poet imitates the long epanaleptic poem of Paul the Deacon on the life and miracles of St. Benedict. For the composition of Paul the Deacon, cf. E. Dümmler, MGH Poetae latini 1.36–41; see also Manitius, Geschichte I (Munich 1911) 257, 260. Manitius (Geschichte III [1931] 300–305) fails to refer to the poem in honor of St. Scholastica in discussing the work of Alberic. In his treatment of Bertharius of Monte Cassino (abbot 848–882?) (Geschichte I 608–609), Manitius speaks of two poems in honor of St. Scholastica, contained in MS Vat. lat. 1202, as being in the same tradition as a poem to St. Benedict, found in the same MS. The latter, however, beginning O Benedicte pater cunctis celeberrime terris, Qui confessorum culmen honoris habes, (MS Vat. lat. 1202, fol. 94^v-98^v; ed. Traube, MGH Poetae latini 3.398–402), is not the poem of Bertharius (which according to Traube is to be found in Monte Cassino MS 1, s. x and MS 453, s. xi [ed. MGH Poetae latini 3.394–398]) but, like the two poems in honor of St. Scholastica, appears to be the work of an eleventh-century Cassinese monk. On which, cf. Meyvaert, P., op. cit. 23 n. 1, discussing his inability to locate the Beneventan MS of the tenth century mentioned by Traube. Lentini (Scolastica 217) knows of the elegy in honor of St. Scholastica, the Sponsa decora Dei, in Mabillon, Acta sanctorum ordinis s. Benedicti 1 (ed. 1935) 42–44, where it is attributed to Paul the Deacon. However, in the index (nomina auctorum praecipuorum), s.v. Paulus Diaconus, Mabillon retracts this attribution and places the blame for the false ascription on Arnoldus Wion (Lignum vitae II [Venice 1595] 47) and Prosper Martinengius (Pia quaedam poemata [Rome 1590] 256–258).Google Scholar

²⁸ Traube, L. (MGH Poetae latini 3.389–392) proves that both poems in honor of St. Scholastica are intimately related, and thinks that they were composed by the same hand. This was also the opinion expressed by Mabillon (Acta SS. O.S.B. 1.44 n.b). Baronius, however, considered the second poem in honor of St. Scholastica to be the work of Bertharius; on which, cf. Bethmann, Archiv 10.323. Lacking further evidence, Traube hesitated to ascribe either poem to Bertharius. In view of the cogent arguments which favor Alberic's authorship of the Sponsa decora Dei, the O benedicta soror might rightly also be claimed for him. The latter poem is printed in Mabillon, Acta SS. O.S.B. 1.44–45, and in a corrupt and abbreviated form in PL 95.1593–1594, where it is reprinted from Wion, A., loc. cit. Both Manitius (Geschichte I 608–609) and Traube (MGH Poetae latini 3.392) are mistaken when they assign MS Vat. lat. 1202 as the source of the O benedicta soror. It is certainly not to be found in that MS. At present, therefore, no MS source for this poem is known. Both poems in honor of St. Scholastica are listed in Bibliotheca hagiographica latina II (1901) no. 7519–7520 as ‘perperam adscripta Paulo diacono,’ and are expressly given to Alberic.Google Scholar

²⁹ Haskins (Casinensia 1.118–119) cites four verses from this poem and also the couplet with which Alberic ends his Flores rhetorici:Google Scholar

The Commendatio is found on fol. 59–66^v, immediately after the Flores rhetorici, and in the same hand. The Breviarium follows on fol. 67–104^v; for its last part, the Consideratio rithmorum, see n. 18 supra and Appendix A.

³⁰ Lentini, , Studi gregoriani IV 55.Google Scholar

³¹ This item in the De viris illustribus is simplified to read: De monachis, but because of its relation to the other titles there listed may be considered as a variant of De monacho penitente. Google Scholar

³² The one exception to this order is the reference to Alberic's letters to St. Peter Damian, placed in both sources in the midst of the eschatological titles. Google Scholar

³³ The reference here to hymns in honor of St. Scholastica may possibly be a duplication of the versus in vitam Scholasticae S., mentioned further on in the De viris illustribus and in the Chronicon. Google Scholar

³⁴ The Prolegomena of Wattenbach, W. to his edition of the Chronicon casinense (MGH Scriptores 7.551ff) is still the point of departure for all recent studies. The basic work on the forgeries of Peter the Deacon is Caspar, E., Petrus Diaconus und die Monte Cassineser Fälschungen (Berlin 1909); the inquiry was carried on in recent years by Bloch, H. ‘The Schism of Anacletus II and the Glanfeuil Forgeries of Peter the Deacon of Monte Cassino’ Traditio 8 (1952) 159–264. Here the problem of the Registrum Petri Diaconi is brilliantly, investigated for the purposes of this specialized study. Leidinger, G. ‘Der Codex lat. Monac. 4623 (Chronik des Leo Marsicanus),’ Casinensia 2 (Monte Cassino 1929) 365–368, introduces the problem of MS Munich lat. 4623, s. xi, fols. 85–189, the famous fragment of the Chronicon which brings the history of Monte Cassino to 1057 (Chron. Cas. 2.92). Leidinger thinks that both text and glosses are by the same hand, that of Leo Marsicanus himself. This view, however, is contradicted by Lowe, E. A. (The Beneventan Script [Oxford 1914] 330) who contends that only the corrrections, additions, and marginalia in MS Munich lat. 4623 are by Leo. Fundamental investigations into the relation of Peter the Deacon to the four redactions of the Chronicon are Wilhelm Smidt, ‘Ueber den Verfasser der drei letzten Redaktionen der Chronik Leos von Monte Cassino,’ Papsttum und Kaisertum: Festschrift Kehr P. (München 1926) 263–286; Smidt, W. ‘Guido von Monte Cassino und die Fortsetzung der Chronik Leos durch Petrus Diaconus,’ Festschrift Albert Brackmann dargebracht (Weimar 1931) 293–323; Klewitz, H.W. ‘Petrus Diaconus und die Montecassineser Klosterchronik des Leo von Ostia,’ Archiv für Urkundenforschung 14 (1936) 414–453; Smidt, W. ‘Die vermeintliche und die wirkliche Urgestalt der Chronik Leos von Montecassino,’ Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken 28 (1937–1938) 286–297; cf. also Manitius, M. Geschichte III (1931) 546–552. To Smidt (Guido von Monte Cassino and Quellen) we owe the introduction of Guido of Monte Cassino as the continuator of the Chronicon between Leo Marsicanus and Peter the Deacon. With Smidt's conclusions, however, Klewitz (Petrus Diaconus 419) is not completely satisfied. Guido's place in the history of the Chronicon is accepted by Bloch, H. DOP 163–224. Some very significant observations on the problem of Peter and Guido of Monte Cassino are found in Dom Paul Meyvaert, ‘Peter the Deacon and the Tomb of Saint Benedict,’ Revue bénédictine 65 (1955) 3–70 (especially at 27 n. 2, 29 n. 4, 41 n. 1, 44–45). From Meyvaert's latest study of the handwriting of Peter the Deacon (‘The Autographs of Peter the Deacon,’ Bulletin of the John Ryland's Library 38 [Sept. 1955] 114–138) it becomes clear that Peter the Deacon had no part in the writing of MS Munich lat. 4623, as contended by Smidt (Quellen 293–294) and Inguanez, M. (Miscellanea cassinese 11 [1932] 40), nor in the writing of the original version of redactio 4. Meyvaert suspects that the additions to MS Munich lat. 4623 and redactio 4 are both the work of Guido. Indeed, the role played by Guido in the composition of both the Chronicon and the Registrum, possibly even in their forgeries, seems to be more significant than Smidt dreamed of. Was Guido Peter's teacher in arts not included in the trivium and quadrivium? That the last word, however, has not been written about the Chronicon can be gathered from the ‘postscript’ to Meyvaert's article (Autographs 137–138). From the discovery of new hagiographical works of Leo of Ostia it has become difficult to decide whether it was Guido or Leo himself, as Leidinger suggested, who was responsible for the marginalia of MS Munich lat. 4623.Google Scholar

³⁵ This conclusion would be most likely, given the present edition of the Chronicon (MGH Scriptores 7.728) and Wattenbach's editorial directions. Unless he were conversant with the work of Wilhelm Smidt, the unwary student would certainly credit Peter the Deacon with the continuation of the Chronicon, beginning with Chron. Cas. 3.34. But cf. Smidt, Guido 316–317 n. 7, where it is shown that Chron. Cas. 3.34 is merely a shortened version of Chron. Cas. 3.32, a part of Peter the Deacon's third redaction, and not the Continuatio, which actually begins with Chron. Cas. 3.35, i.e., with the biographical account of Alberic, and which on Peter's own testimony is the work of Guido. Cf. n. 38 infra. Google Scholar

³⁶ Cf. Caspar, , Petrus Diaconus , passim; Bloch, Glanfeuil Forgeries 191–203.Google Scholar

³⁷ Cf. supra n. 34. Google Scholar

³⁸ Smidt's best argument for Guido's authorship of the Continuatio rests on Peter the Deacon's entry for his teacher Guido in the De viris illustribus 41 (PL 173.1044–1045; cited however, by Smidt as cap. 42 from MS Monte Cassino 361, s. xii, p. 142): ‘Guido Casinensis, vir in divina et humana eruditione clarissimus, religione et vita probatus, scripsit historiam Henrici imperatoris, visionem Alberici monachi Casinensis, versus de fortuna eiusdem loci… [lacuna] preterea que in Historia Casinensi deerant, a temporibus scilicet Oderisii primi usque ad hunc diem, adiunxit.’ While Guido is now generally accepted as Leo of Ostia's first continuator, the precise extent of his actual contribution as worked out by Smidt (Guido 320–321) has been frequently overlooked. Cf. Bloch, H. DOP 205 n. 138, where Leo is still credited with Chron. Cas. 3.63, and 208 n. 146, where the same is done for Chron. Cas. 3.55. The following sections of the Chronicon are ascribed by Smidt to Guido: (1) Chron. Cas. 3.35–74 (MGH Script. 7.728–754); (2) Chron. Cas. 4.1–87 (MGH Script. 7.760–806); (3) Chron. Cas. 4.88–95 (MGH Script. 7. 806–810). The two prior sections were done at Monte Cassino between May 22, 1115 and March or April 1126; the third section at Monte Cassino ca. 1127–1133. Peter the Deacon, besides reworking these three parts with numerous interpolations, is the author of the Prologue to Chron. Cas. 4 (MGH Script. 7.754 ff.) and Chron. Cas. 4.96–130. Smidt (Quellen und Forschungen 295–297), among other evidence presented in the case of Guido, suggests that Peter the Deacon considered his teacher as a dangerous rival. This rivalry might well explain the strange disappearance of all works listed in the De viris illustribus as the product of Guido's pen, losses which occurred either through outright destruction, assimilation into Peter's known works, or, as in the case of the continuation and revision of the Chronicon casinense by Guido, by disposing of the evidence by gift to the monastery of Benedictbeuern (= MS Munich lat. 4623). See also Smidt, , Guido 304. It may be further suggested that Guido's failure to appear in the Chronicon, except by indirection, may also be charged to Peter's obscurantist tendencies.Google Scholar

³⁹ Cf. De viris illus. 45 (PL 173.1046); Haskins, C. H., Casinensia 116; Poole, R. L. Lectures on the History of the Papal Chancery (Cambridge 1915) 83–88. The probable stylistic influence of Alberic on John of Gaeta is common knowledge. It is likewise noteworthy, in connection with the general theme of the present study, that in the matter of cursus the preferences of Alberic, as studied by Lentini, A. (‘La vita Dominici S. di Alberico Cassinese,’ Benedictina 5 [1951] 57–77), are approximately the same as those discovered by the author in the prose of St. Peter Damian; cf. Blum, St. Peter Damian 57–58. Common to both Damian and Alberic is the preferred use of cursus velox for final cursus. Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Assuming with Smidt (Guido 320–321) that Guido began this part of the Chronicon (3.35–74; cf. note 38) about May, 1115, we may infer that Alberic's death occurred shortly before this time. Lentini, A. (Studi gregoriani IV 88), however, places his death not later than 1105.Google Scholar

⁴¹ No one appears to have raised the question of Peter's authorship of the De viris illustribus before Dom Paul Meyvaert's (cf. note 34) discussion of this point, Revue bénédictine 65 (1955) 27 n. 2. Google Scholar

⁴² ‘Guido praeterea noster institutor, moribus vitaeque praecipuus, ante hoc ferme septennium, opusculum scribere aggressus est illud; sed laboriosum inibi videns jacere materias ea dimisit facilitate qua coeperat: quod si ille, longe me in sermone sensuque praepollens, rem coeptam dimisit, ego qui acumine mentis iners, sermoneque impolitus, et variis rebus sum implicatus, quid acturus sum?’ — (De viris illus. prologus [PL 173.1010 C]). Is the italicized phrase (italics mine) to be taken literally, or does it, perhaps, in its relation to Guido, bespeak the many literary frauds which Peter was in the process of perpetrating? Google Scholar

⁴³ The works thus identified are the following: (1) Breviarium de dictamine; (2) Vita et obitus sancte Scolastice; (3) Homilia de s. Scolastica; (4) Vita s. Dominici de Sora; (5) Passio s. Modesti; (6) Versus in honorem s. Scolastice. For the editions of these works, cf. supra n. 18 and n. 20; Lentini, Studi gregoriani IV 55 n. 4. In MS Vat. Ottob. lat. 1354, s. xi/xii, fol. 85–90^v, the present author found what may be a further work of Alberic, entitled: De longitudine et brevitate principalium syllabarum Alberici. Inc. ‘Omnes vocales principales.’ Google Scholar

⁴⁴ For evidence contained in MS Vat. lat. 202, throwing doubt on two titles attributed to Alberic, cf. infra, 122f. There is little reason, moreover, to suspect that Peter the Deacon or anyone else destroyed the works of Alberic to build up his own reputation, as in the case of the works of Guido of Monte Cassino. On which, however, cf. Smidt, W., Quellen 295–296; Smidt sees the hand of Peter in the non-survival of Alberic's Contra Heinricum imperatorem de electione Romani pontificis, a companion piece to Guido's Historia Henrici IV imperatoris, also lost.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ Chron. Cas. 3.35 (MGH Script. 7.728).Google Scholar

⁴⁶ This is true of all the correspondence addressed to Peter Damian; cf. Dressler, Petrus Damiani 2. Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Opusc. 37 ¹: De variis sacris quaestionibus (PL 145.621–630); Opusc. 37² (PL 145.630–634); Opusc. 32 (PL 145.543–560). For the evidence pointing to Opusc. 32 as a third letter to Alberic, see Blum, , Studi gregoriani V (1956) 291–298; cf. also supra n. 12.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Dressler, , Petrus Damiani 74 n. 329. Two of the four codices listed in the 1532 MS catalogue of Monte Cassino have survived, viz., MSS Monte Cassino 358 and 359, both in Beneventan script of the eleventh century.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ For the letter of Desiderius to Damian, promising to celebrate the anniversary of his death, cf. PL 145.17 D; Dressler, Petrus Damiani 72 n. 308. In the Kalendarium of Monte Cassino (cf. PL 145.17 n. 1) is the following entry: ‘VIII Kal. Martii obiit venerandae memoriae domnus Petrus, Ostiensis episcopus.’ Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Opusc. 33 praefatio (PL 145.559 D): ‘Non ignorare te patior, venerande Pater, quia Guidunculus ille, puer videlicet noster, acrem moeroris aculeum meis visceribus intulit, cum id, quod mihi minatus es, per ordinem nuntiavit. Dixisse siquidem te retulit, quia nisi Casinense monasterium, quod utique nobiliter regis, inviserem, orationem sancti loci, si te vivente defungerer, non haberem.’ Franz Neukirch (cf. Dressler, Petrus Damiani 240; Blum, St. Peter Damian 202) dated this letter for 1065 summer – 1066 summer, or roughly fifty years before Guido began the continuation of the Chronicon. Dressler (op. cit. 183 n. 55) noted that Guido is one of very few Cassinese monks referred to by name in Damian's letters. Others are: Domnus Martinus (Opusc. 35 praef. [PL 145.589 B]); John (Marsicanus) of Monte Cassino (Epist. 4.8 [PL 144.309 D]); and, of course, Desiderius and Alberic. Guido, moreover, may well have been the scribe sent from Monte Cassino to Fonte Avellana at Damian's request; cf. Epist. 2.11 (PL 144.276 A-B).Google Scholar

⁵¹ The usually excellent treatment of medieval poets by Raby is of little help on Alberic. Only incidental comments appear in his Secular Latin Poetry I (1934) 376–377; in the older Christian Latin Poetry (1927) 240, and its 2d. ed. (1953), one line records the sad loss of Alberic's verse. Manitius (Geschichte III 300–305) thinks that the titles of Alberic's poetry reflect a pattern of thought similar to that of Peter Damian, and that their non-survival would indicate that they had only local significance. Google Scholar

⁵² Cf. Horace, , Satires 1.10.34, 2.3.235.Google Scholar

⁵³ Diaconus, Albericus, Breviarium de dictamine 10 (Rockinger, Briefsteller 45).Google Scholar

⁵⁴ MS Munich lat. 14784, fol. 92^v-104^v, cf. Appendix A, below. It is worthy of note that in the Consideratio Alberic illustrates two types of metrical rhythms with hymns found in MS Vat. lat. 3797, without identifying them as works of Peter Damian: (1) the octosyllabic rhythm (fol. 93) is demonstrated by the first line, ‘Maria virgo regia David stirpe progenita.’ This poem, generally attributed to Peter Damian, is found in MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 366^v. (2) The dissyllabic rhythm is illustrated by the first line, ‘O genitrix eterni virgo maria verbi,’ also ascribed to Peter Damian (= MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 361^v). For a further discussion of this last hymn, cf. infra 111. It may be significant that Alberic, while identifying other citations from Peter Damian in the prose section of the Breviarium de dictamine, fails to mention him as the author of these two pieces of verse. Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Cf. Haskins, , Casinensia 118 where the Consideratio rithmorum, left unedited by Rockinger, is considered to be the second part of the Breviarium de dictamine. Fol. 92^v of MS Munich lat. 14784 reads: ‘Explicit prima pars eucheridii de prosis cum speris suis. Incipit secunda de rithmis.’ In the margin is found the title: Considerano Rithmorum. Google Scholar

⁵⁶ MS Munich lat. 14784, fol. 93–93^v. Google Scholar

⁵⁷ From a sample analysis of the four rithmi mentioned above (PL 145.977–983 = MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 362–363^v), it is obvious that the rules set down by Alberic are carefully followed. Each contains a three-line stanza with fifteen syllables to the line, arranged 8+7. The first eight-syllable phrase closes with a long (producta) second-last syllable before the accent. The second, seven-syllable phrase consistently shows an unaccented penult. Google Scholar

⁵⁸ The Song of St. Peter Damiani on the Joyes and Glory of Paradise (Washington 1928); Hurlbut, S. A. Hortus Conclusus: A Series of Mediaeval Latin Hymns, Part VI (Washington 1936) 1–17. Both works contain Hurlbut's English translation of the Ad perhennis. Hurlbut admits (Hortus Conclusus 3) that he made his translation before discovering more than twenty English versions of this hymn done before him. For a discussion of the English translations of the Rithmi ascribed to Peter Damian, cf. Julian, J. A Dictionary of Hymnology (rev. ed. London 1915) 13, 278, 451, 1549, 1599, 1643; for the Ad perhennis, cf. Hurlbut, Song of St. Peter Damiani 19–23. Of the four rhythms, only the De die mortis and the De gaudio paradisi seem to have been rendered into English. For translations of the Ad perhennis into German, see Hurlbut, , Song 24; Dressler, Petrus Damiani 197 n. 127; a German translation of the De poenis inferni appears in Friedrich Wolters, Hymnen und Sequenzen (2d ed. Berlin 1922) 92–94.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Neale, J. M., Hymns , Chiefly Mediaeval on the Joys and Glories of Paradise (London 1865) 2–15. For the same author's translation of the De die mortis, cf. Mediaeval Hymns and Sequences (3d ed. London 1867) 52–54.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Dreves, G. M. and Blume, C. AH 48 (Leipzig 1905) 29–78. The more one works with a particular section of the editions of the AH, the more one comes to agree with the severe though somewhat chauvinist conclusions of Henri Leclercq (‘Hymnes,’ DACL 6.2917–2922). The work is very uneven — the edition of the tetralogy in question is based on MSS of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries — and shows an arbitrariness in choice of readings which is at times inexplicable. For the hymns attributed to Peter Damian, the editing of Dreves and Blume (AH 48), with its heavy dependence on late MSS which represent for the most part corrupt readings of the texts, is only a slight improvement over the original work of Gaetani. For a milder, but yet critical opinion of the AH, cf. Wilmart, A., Auteurs spirituels et textes dévots du moyen âge latin (Paris 1932) 138 n. 3; Szövérffy, J., ‘The Legends of St. Peter in Medieval Latin Hymns,’ Traditio 10 (1954) 276–277.Google Scholar

⁶¹ For a detailed description of the poetry contained in this MS, cf. infra 106–8, 118. Hurlbut (Song of St. Peter Damiani 4) and Blume, C. (AH 51 [1908] 238) contend that Gaetani used MS Vat. lat. 3797 for his edition of Damian's poetry. But, to cite only one instance, a comparison of stanza 18 of the Ad perhennis, as edited by Gaetani (PL 145.982 D; 145.864 A), with the reading in MS Vat. lat. 3797 makes it perfectly obvious that this MS was not used by him. Moreover, at least seven pieces of verse contained in this MS are left unedited by Gaetani; on which, cf. infra, nn. 78–81.Google Scholar

⁶² Clemens Blume, AH 51 (1908) 238–243. In reading this correctorium to AH 48, one is bewildered by Blume's reporting of the variant readings from MS Vat. lat. 3797, done in such a way as to make this appendix almost useless. The reason for the lack of clarity, undoubtedly, is the fact that Blume never saw the MS, but depended on notes sent to him by Bannister (cf. AH 51.238). Remembering, moreover, that MS Vat. lat. 3797 is 400 years older than any MS cited for the four rithmi in AH 48, one is puzzled, to say the least, to find fifteenth-century readings preferred to those of the eleventh century. Bannister's claim that MS Vat. lat. 3797 was lost in the Vatican library and discovered by him is disproved by the fact that it was cited and used throughout in the Vita s. Romualdi (PL 144.953 n. 167), about 1736. The notes for this edition are anonymous, but were done after 1733–1736, since they refer to the 2d ed. of Du Cange, Glossarium (PL 144.1004 n. 326).Google Scholar

⁶³ Poésies populaires latines antérieurs au douzième siècle (Paris 1843) 131–135.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Du Méril (op. cit. 131) does not venture to date this MS. The author of the addendum to Julian, Dictionary of Hymnology 1549, adds the remark: ‘A MS of the tenth century.’ Hurlbut (Song of St. Peter Damiani 7) is the first to have looked in vain for the Ad perhennis under the number given by Du Méril. The present author called for MS Paris, B. N. lat. 10587, s. xi in. and found it to contain eight folios devoted entirely to the Liber hymnorum of Notker, with no evidence of the Ad perhennis. On which, cf. Wolfram von den Steinen, Notker der Dichter und seine geistige Welt: Editionsband II (Bern 1948) 157, 204, where it is shown by internal evidence that this MS came directly from St. Gall. See also Léopold Delisle, ‘Inventaire des manuscrits conservés à la bibliothèque impériale,’ Bibliothèque de l’école des chartes 24 (1863) 191: ‘MS 10587 (olim MS Lat. 1000) = Préface et commencement du Liber ymnorum Notkeri Balbuli. xi s.’ Google Scholar

⁶⁵ That such a MS exists seems clear from the variant readings which appear in Du Méril's text. The oldest MS of the Ad perhennis in the Bibliothèque nationale seems to be a MS of the fifteenth century, included in Imprim, B. N.é D 6115, fol. 23^v.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ These titles correspond to Carm. 40 (PL 145.931–933) and Carm. 220 (PL 145.971–972). Google Scholar

⁶⁷ For the most recent discussion of MS Vat. lat. 3797, see Blum, , St. Peter Damian 65 and the literature there cited; Dressler, Petrus Damiani 223. A descriptive catalogue of this MS appears as Appendix III in Blum, op. cit. 206–214. This catalogue, however, is defective for the last 26 folios, which contain most of the poetical works ascribed to Peter Damian.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ It should be noted, however, that eight carmina, without ascription to Damian but generally appearing after his sermons on the same theme, are found within the prose section of this codex: (1) Carm. 98: Inc. ‘Dulce martyr eximius’ (PL 145.950) fol. 277^v; (2) Carm. 117: Inc. ‘Magnum ruphini meritum’ (PL 145.953) fol. 281^v; (3) Carm. 118: Inc. ‘Certat martyr egregius’ (PL 145.954) fol. 281^v; (4) Carm. 122: Inc. ‘Magna fidelis merita’ (PL 145.956) fol. 293^v; (5) Carm. 77: Inc. ‘Virginis virgo venerande custos’ (PL 145.943) fol. 312; (6) Carm. 78: Inc. ‘Fidelis plebs cum angelis’ (PL 145.943) fol. 312; (7) Carm. 79: Inc. ‘Magna iohannis merita’ (PL 145.944) fol. 312; (8) Carm. 97: Inc. ‘Insigne decus martyrum’ (PL 145.949) fol. 334. All but Carm. 118, which is likely a divisio of Carm. 117, occur again on fol. 372^v-373, where the first stanza of each is either set to music or prepared for musical notation. Google Scholar

⁶⁹ The ascription, however, is not explicit but merely implied by the presence of this poetry in a codex containing the recognizable prose of Peter Damian. Damian's interest in poetic composition and evidence of such composition are found throughout his writings. A partial list would include the following references: Epist. 1.15 (PL 144.235 B); Epist. 1.20 (PL 144.246 D); Epist. 4.9 (PL 144.313 C); Opusc. 19 (PL 145.432 D); Opusc. 34 (PL 145.584 A); Opusc. 45 (PL 145.701 C); Opusc. 49 (PL 145.732). Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Hurlbut (Song of St. Peter Damiani 6) noted the older pagination accompanying the arabic foliation. The author is indebted, however, to Dr. Fridolin Dressler for calling his attention to the two missing folios (olim 408 and 409). Google Scholar

⁷¹ The authenticity of Damian's epigrammatic verse is assured because of the corroborating evidence of the three great eleventh-century codices, MSS Vat. Urb. lat. 503, Monte Cassino 358, and Vat. lat. 3797. If further confirmation were needed, it could be had from Damian's reference to this verse in his known prose works. Thus, Opusc. 45 (PL 145.701 C): ‘Nam et nos super hac re distichum feceramus, quod hic inserere otiosum esse non ducimus:Google Scholar

Sed heu me miserum! hoc inter me et domnum Leonem, quod inter fortissimum David et delirum evenit histrionem. Ille siquidem viribus fortia fecerat, iste sola voce triumphalia ejus gesta decantai. Ille nimirum se Deo novit per somni mactare conflictum; nos versiculos facimus ad similitudinem puerorum.’ Or, Opusc. 49 (PL 145.732): ‘Boninum et Petrum, si solito more videris aliquando excelsius canere, hoc distichon meo nomine in eorum manibus pone:

For a study of this verse, as edited and arranged in PL 145, AH 48, and AH 51, and of the relation of Gaetani's arrangement to the order in which the poems appear in the MSS, cf. A. Wilmart, ‘Le recueil des poèmes et des prières de saint Pierre Damien,’ Revue bénédictine 41 (1929) 342–357. For uses of this epigrammatic verse as political and religious commentary, cf. Dressler, Petrus Damiani 115, 155–157.

⁷² Carm . 210 (PL 145.968 B).Google Scholar

⁷³ Carm. 214 (PL 145.968 D).Google Scholar

⁷⁴ This title refers to the first of what are called in this study the ‘appendix poems,’ Carm. 61 (PL 145.937): Inc. ‘O genitrix eterni virgo Maria verbi.’ Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Hurlbut, , Song of St. Peter Damiani 6. This is purest conjecture, since no study of other samples of late handwriting found in the marginalia of this codex has been made; nor is there any evidence that this handwriting has been compared with the known writing of Gaetani.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Blume (AH 51.238–241) assumes, on the evidence of MS Vat. lat. 3797, that all poetry found in this MS is to be ascribed to Peter Damian. He finds confirmation for this assumption in the repeated use of at least one characteristic doxology which recurs in eighteen carmina. Cf. also Dreves, AH 48.29–30. The doxology in question is the following:Google Scholar

Sit patri laus ingenito,

sit decus unigenito,

sit utriusque parili

maiestas summa flamini.

The eighteen carmina (using the numbering of the PL edition) which bear this final stanza (frequently abbreviated in MS Vat. lat. 3797) are: Carm. 35, 36, 72, 74, 75, 76, 79, 96, 97, 98, 118, 120, 123, 125, 126, 129; Hymnus s. Ianuarii episcopi et martyris. In laudibus: Inc. ‘Lux alma sacri martyris’ (AH 51.243, No. 209 = MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 366); and Hymnus s. Ambrosii episcopi in laudibus: Inc. ‘Ambrosi sydus aureum’ (AH 22.25, No. 32; AH 51.241 = MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 366). If this doxology is Damian's — a conclusion which is not certain — then it would be possible to isolate his authentic hymns. The doxology in question, however, may be only a trite, liturgical conclusion, popular in the eleventh century, and its use would therefore prove nothing. In MS Paris, B.N. lat. 5351, s. xi/xiii (folios in question dated tentatively by M^lle d'Alverny as s. xii) the author found this doxology used for the Hymnus in festivitate b. Odilonis (fol. 174) Inc. ‘O uir ubique nobilis.’ This hymn is a divisio of the Commenda gregem domino, pastor insignis Odilo, which precedes it. On which, cf. U. Chevalier, Repertorium hymnologicum 3680; M. Marrier and A. Duchesne, Bibliotheca Cluniacensis (Paris 1614) 328; PL 142.1041–1044. The two hymns in question follow in the MS immediately after the Vita b. Odilonis of Peter Damian (fol. 165–174 = PL 144.925–944), which might suggest Damian as their author. But nowhere, to the author's knowledge, have these hymns been claimed for him. It may be important to note that fourteen of the hymns bearing this doxology occur in the section of MS Vat. lat. 3797, about to be discussed above (fol. 361^v-366^v), while the remaining four are scattered among the prose works of this MS (fol. 277^v-334). The doxology appears in four of the poems (Nos. 16, 17, 26, 27) which will later be claimed for Alberic of Monte Cassino.

⁷⁷ G. 61, etc. indicates the number of the carmen in Gaetani's edition, reprinted in PL 145.918–936. Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Parts of this hymn and of the preceding (No. 19) are unedited in Gaetani. Cf., however, Dreves (AH 48.40–41) where they are complete. Google Scholar

⁷⁹ This hymn is unedited in Gaetani, indicating that he did not use MS Vat. lat. 3797. Cf. AH 22, No. 404; AH 51.241, where Blume admits this hymn into the fold of Damian's authentic works. Google Scholar

⁸⁰ The three hymns in honor of St. Januarius (No. 34, 35, 36) are also unedited in Gaetani. For which, cf. AH 51.241–243. Google Scholar

⁸¹ The Ambrosi sydus aureum is also unedited in Gaetani; cf. AH 22.25, No. 32; AH 51.241. This hymn is also found in MS Paris, Mazarine lat. 364 (script. Benevent. arm. 1099–1105) fol. 149, entitled: Sancti Ambrosii episcopi hymnus Petri Damiani (cf. Wilmart, A., Auteurs spirituels [1932] 138–139); and in MS Vat. Urbin. lat. 585 (script. Benevent. ann. 1099–1105), fol. 113, entitled: In sancti Ambrosii (cf. Lowe, E. A., Beneventan Script 367).Google Scholar

⁸² This hymn is preceded by three lessons, entitled: Lectiones ad honorem s. Marie ad matutinum cottidianis diebus; cf. PL 145.935–936 (Carm. 49, 50, 51). These lessons, unaccompanied by the six above-listed carmina (Nos. 38–43 = G. 48, 52–56), occur also in MS Vat. Pietro, S. D. 206, s. xiv, fol. 180^v. The six hymns here listed in MS Vat. lat. 3797 appear also in MS Paris, B.N. lat 1087, s. xi, fol. 115^v-116. This codex, a Graduale et prosarium ad usum Cluniacensem, does not ascribe the hymns to Peter Damian; also in MS Verona, Cathedral Chapter CIX (102), s. xi ex. (on which, cf. Mearns, J., Early Latin Hymnaries : An Index of Hymns in Hymnaries Before 1100 [Cambridge 1913] 14, 53, 63, 80).Google Scholar

⁸³ Opposite the titles found in MS Vat. lat. 3797, the corresponding titles are given from the Chronicon casinense 3.35 (MGH Script. 7.728) and from the De viris illus. 21 (PL 173. 1032–1033). Those found in De viris illus. only are marked by an asterisk. Google Scholar

⁸⁴ The entry in De viris illus. specifies hymnos, but only one hymn in honor of St. Peter is found in this ‘appendix’ collection. Google Scholar

⁸⁵ Nos. 23, 24, 25 (G. 47, 44, 45 = AH 48.32–34, Nos. 4–6). No. 24 Inc. ‘Terrena cuncta iubilent’ (G. 44 [PL 145.933]) is entitled by Gaetani: In annuntiatione beatissimae virginis Mariae. In the MS (fol. 365), however, it is clearly a hymn for matins, following No. 23 Inc. ‘Gaudium mundi nova stella celi,’ entitled: In assumptione sanete Marie hymnus. Google Scholar

⁸⁶ For the tradition of this MS and its relation to the scriptorium of Fonte Avellana, cf. Blum, St. Peter Damian 65. Google Scholar

⁸⁷ For a complete listing of the MSS found for the seventeen pieces of verse ascribed here tentatively to Alberic, cf. Appendix A. The only other MS of the eleventh century containing a significant group of these poems is MS Florence, Laurenziana Conv. Soppr. 524, s. xi ex. (ca. 1070). This MS, a Cluniac breviary from Strumi in the upper valley of the Arno, contains without ascription Nos. 18, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25 (cf. supra 109). Granting that Mearns (Early Latin Hymnaries xviii) has dated this MS accurately, one may well question the attribution of this verse to either Damian or Alberic. Its liturgical use in the last quarter of the eleventh century seems almost to demand an earlier author. Google Scholar

⁸⁸ MSS Utrecht 263, Vat. lat. 6749, and Vat. Pietro, S. D. 206, all s. xiv and all containing large quantities of verse traditionally ascribed to Peter Damian, seem to be at least indirectly dependent upon MS Vat. lat. 3797. MSS Utrecht 263 and Vat. lat. 6749 contain the same poems in exactly the same order, and, while not following the arrangement of their model, show closer dependence on the eleventh-century MS Vat. lat. 3797 than does MS Vat. Pietro, S. D. 206. The latter contains only six pieces of the so-called ‘appendix’ verse (Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 23), but (fol. 192^v) has Carm. 127 (PL 145.959 A), found otherwise only in MS Vat. lat. 3797. Also, in the interest of tracing the MSS used by Gaetani, MS Vat. Pietro, S. D. 206 (fol. 244) is the only MS discovered which contains Carm. 63: Inc. ‘Ave David filia, sancta mundo nata’ (PL 145.939 D; AH 48.74), and Carm. 64: Inc. ‘O miseratrix, o dominatrix, precipe dictu’ (PL 145.940 D; AH 48.59). These two hymns are widely separated from the other verse, and bear no evidence of specific authorship. In this connection also MS Monte Cassino 111, s. xi, pp. 409–410, is the only MS thus far discovered for Carm. 62 (PL 145.939 B; AH 48.76), the famous Quis est hic qui pulsat ad ostium, and may be the source from which this poem found its way into Gaetani's anthology ascribed to Peter Damian. MS Utrecht 263, formerly a codex of the Carthusian house of the Holy Saviour near Utrecht, has several dependent MSS of the fifteenth century, notably MSS Utrecht 220, 264, and 265, which contain many pieces of Damian's prose and verse. In MS Utrecht 263, fol. 21^v is found a marginal note which may help in identifying the source of this MS: ‘Hic in exemplari deficit columpna et dimidia, unde pro ipsis spacium est dimissum.’Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Raby, , Secular Latin Poetry I 272–273; Christian Latin Poetry 253–254; Waddell, H., The Wandering Scholars (6th ed. London 1932) 93.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ No. 1 of the ‘appendix collection’ (Carm. 61:PL 145.937–938; AH 48.52–53; AH 51.240). Google Scholar

⁹¹ Ph. Lauer, Bibliothèque Nationale: Catalogue général des manuscrits latins I (Paris 1939) No. 933. Google Scholar

⁹² These verses are entitled in the MS: Hymnum sanctae Mariae ritmice compositum. Fol. 109^v-110 are in a hand quite different from that found in the major portion of the codex, apparently s. xi ex. or s. xii in. On the abbey of Notre-Dame de la Grasse, cf. Cottineau, L.H., Répertoire topo-bibliographique des abbayes et prieurés I (1939) 1334–1335.Google Scholar

⁹³ Cf. Mearns, J., Early Latin Hymnaries xi, 60. Dreves (AH 48.53) calls this codex an ‘Hymnarium MS Anglo-saxonicum saec. 11.’ Besides the MSS listed above, the 0 genitrix has been found in the following: (1) MS Naples, Bibl. Naz. VI E. 43 (an. 1097), a psalter and hymnal ‘S. Sophiae Beneventanae ’; (2) MS Vat. Ottob. lat. 311 add. s. xi; (3) MS Monte Cassino 111, s. xi, p. 409, followed by Carm. 62 (PL 145.939), on which, cf. supra n. 88; (4) MS Utrecht 263, s. xiv, fol. 59; (5) MS Vat. lat. 6749, s. xiv, fol. 249; (6) MS Vat. Pietro, S. D. 206, s. xiv, fol. 94^v. In MS Munich lat. 14784, s. xii, fol. 93, in the Consideratio rithmorum, Alberic says of this hymn: ‘Bissillabus est qui constat ex membris constantibus septenis sillabis, et huiusmodi rithmus plerumque constat ex membris quattuor et penultima accentu producta. Ut hoc est: O genitrix eterni uirgo maria uerbi.’Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Fol. 115^v-116, where the handwriting is of the eleventh century. There is no ascription of authorship for any of these poems. On fol. 116 musical notation, in a very poor state of preservation, is indicated for each of the hymns. These six hymns are also found in MS Verona, Cathedral Chapter CIX (102), s. xi ex.; for editions, cf. Carm. 48, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56 (PL 145.935–937); AH 48.34–37, and the MSS there listed. Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Cf. Peter Damian, Epist. 6.5 (PL 144.380 A); Blum, St. Peter Damian 15–17. Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Cf. Chevalier, , Repertorium hymnologicum I (1892) 15; Hurlbut, The Song of St. Peter Damiani (Washington 1928), and the literature there cited. See also supra n. 58.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ For the Liber meditationum, cf. PL 40.901–942; Bardenhewer, O., Geschichte der altkirchlichen Literatur IV (Freiburg im B. 1924) 454; Cavallera, F. ‘Augustin (Apocryphes attribués à saint),’ Dictionnaire de spiritualité 1 (1937) 1133. Wilmart, A. ‘Jean de Fécamp, la complainte sur les fins dernièrs,’ Revue d'ascétique et de mystique 9 (1928) 385–387 (in his Auteurs spirituels et textes dévots du moyen âge latin [Paris 1932] 126–137), contends that the Meditationes of the Pseudo-Augustine belong, pour l'ensemble, to Jean de Fécamp. The editio princeps of the Meditationes appeared in Milan (1475). Wilmart (loc. cit.) cites many MSS for the Meditationes, but is of the opinion that the compilation does not appear to have been done before the fifteenth century. He thinks, moreover, that it is of Italian origin. Dom Rivet, the compiler of the information in Histoire littéraire de la France 8 (Paris 1747) 73, states that 23 of the 41 chapters of the Meditationes are the work of Jean de Fécamp. Chapter 1–11, 34, 39, and 41 are, Rivet thinks, for the most part the prayers of St. Anselm, which, together with Chapter 26, the Ad perhennis, were added to the writings of the abbot of Fécamp to form this work of Pseudo-Augustine. For a further summary of the Meditationes, cf. also Hurlbut, S. A. Three Elizabethan Hymns of the Heavenly Jerusalem (Washington 1930). Wilmart (op. cit. 387), speaking of the MSS which contain the Meditationes, mentions MS Munich lat. 26334 referred to by Hurlbut. But MS Munich lat. 26334, s. xv. fol. 1–74 contains the Liber meditationum in 38 chapters and does not include the Ad perhennis. For the latest treatment of the contents of the Meditationes, taken from the Confessio theologica and from the Meditationes ad patrem of Jean de Fécamp, cf. Leclercq, J. et Bonnes, J. P., Un maître de la vie spirituelle au xi^e siècle, Jean de Fécamp (Paris 1946) 156–157; for the edition of the Confessio, ibid. 109–183. Leclercq (loc. cit.) defines the work of Jean de Fécamp in the Meditationes as Chapters 1–9 (PL 40.901–909) and Chapters 12–37 (PL 40.909–936), without averting, however, to Chapter 26 which contains the Ad perhennis. In the present state of our knowledge of the MSS, it seems impossible to determine when and by whom the Ad perhennis entered the collection of the Pseudo-Augutine (but see infra n. 99). The following additional MSS contain the Meditationes in whole or in part: MSS Paris, B.N. lat 2664; 2971, s. xv; 2986, s. xvi; 3429; 3464, s. xv; 3638, s. xv; 3711; 9545, s. xv; 10606, s. xv; 12314, s. xv; 13379, s. xv. Only B.N. lat 9545, fol. 14^v-15^v and B.N. lat 2986, fol. 19–20 contain the Ad perhennis, and that as Chapter 25. That the Augustinian tradition still clung to this poem in the time of Gaetani is evident from the entitlement of his second edition of the Ad perhennis (PL 145.861–864): Petri Damiani, cardinalis Ostiensis, ex dictis beati Augustini. Google Scholar

⁹⁸ On Jean de Fécamp, who was born in St. Peter Damian's native Ravenna toward the end of the tenth century, and died at Fécamp in Normandy, February 22, 1078, cf. besides the works of Wilmart, A. and Leclercq, J. and Bonnes, J. P. listed supra n. 97, Grabmann, M., ‘Johannes v. Fécamp,’ LThK 5 (1933) 497–498; Piolanti, A. ‘Giovanni de Fécamp,’ Enciclopedia cattolica 6 (1951) 558–559; De Ghellinck, J., Le mouvement théologique du xii^e siècle (2d ed. Bruges 1948) 29, 82, 122–123, 249; Cappelletti, G., Verso l'azzurro. Trilogia ascetico-mistica mediovale (Alba 1948).Google Scholar

⁹⁹ Contrary to the opinion of Wilmart mentioned supra n. 97, the earliest inclusion of this poem in the Meditationes seems to be MS Florence, Laurenziana XVIII, dext. 5, s. xiv in.; for which, cf. Hurlbut, Hortus Conclusus (Washington 1936) Part VI 3. Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ Wion's work was not accessible, but citations from it in the Prolegomena of Migne (PL 144.200 D) show that he claimed the Ad perhennis and the O quam dura (Carm. 226 and 225) for Damian. The testimony of Wion, however, is questionable (cf. Lentini, A., Studi gregoriani IV 78 n. 150) and his claim for Damian might well be another ‘arbitrary assertion of the good Arnoldus, who was born only to create or to increase confusion.’ Cf. also supra n. 27.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ Reprinted twice in PL 145.861–864 and 980–983, each following a different MS, and neither depending on MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 362. Google Scholar

¹⁰² The earliest MS known to ascribe this poem explicitly to St. Peter Damian is MS Troyes 1612, s. xv, a MS of Clairvaux (cf. AH 48.67). Google Scholar

¹⁰³ For a full discussion of this MS, cf. supra n. 64. Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ Cf. Mone, J., Lateinische Hymnen des Mittelalters I (Freiburg im B. 1853) 422–425. Mone states that this MS, used for his edition, has the Ad perhennis in twenty three-line stanzas, accompanied by muscial staves to which the melody has not been added. For a late eleventh or early twelfth-century melody, however, cf. MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 372. MSS 6, 7, and 12 listed above were used by Dreves and Blume for their edition of the Ad perhennis (AH 48.66–67).Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ This MS in paper, entitled Traité sur les vertus, et autres morceaux de morale et de piété (Venice 1476), is found in the Réserve des Imprimés of the Bibliothèque nationale. On fol. 23^v is found the following: ‘Expliciunt quatuor ympni Petri Damiani de… Deo gratias.’ Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ This Ad perhennis is not to be confused with the Ad perennis vitae fontem et amoena pascua in MS Paris, B.N. lat 528, s. ix ex. fol. 128; MS Leipzig, Stadtbibliothek (formerly Rep. 1.74), s. x; and MS St. Gallen 573, s. ix/x; edited by Dreves, AH 33.186. It seems almost too obvious to remark that the author of the later Ad perhennis was in some way influenced by the earlier, but to date no evidence is at hand to show physical relationship between the two poems. On which, cf. E. Dümmler, MGH Poetae latini aevi carolini 1 (1881) 31, 79. It might prove decisive in the question of authenticity if a MS of the Ad perennis… et amoena pascua were to be found, showing provenance from either Monte Cassino or from Fonte Avellana.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ For these two MSS, see also supra n. 88. Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ For the evidence of this poem as a work of Peter Damian, cf. supra n. 81. Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ PL 145.737–738. The Pensandum is such a striking passage on death that it was frequently excerpted from the Institutio monialis in the later Middle Ages. This Opusculum was originally sent by Damian about the end of 1059 to a Countess Blanche who had embraced the religious life in Milan. The excerpt appears also in MS Paris, B.N. lat 4154, s. xv, fol. 233–234, entitled: Sermo Petri Damiani de die mortis; MS Valenciennes 182, s. xvi, fol. 114–119; MS Venice, Marciana lat. II.126 (10271): Epistola de die mortis; MS Venice, Marciana lat. XIV.266 (4502) [Ch. 241]: Sermo de morte; MS Venice, Marciana lat. XIV.295 (4348) [No. 16]: Meditatio in hora et de hora mortis. For printed editions, cf. Dressler, Petrus Damiani 228.Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ See n. 86 supra. Google Scholar

¹¹¹ Cf. supra n. 48. Google Scholar

¹¹² The sermons and letters of St. Peter Damian were used by Leo of Ostia in Chron. Cas. 2.16; 2.17; 2.64; 2.99; 3.19. See also Dressler, Petrus Damiani 214 n. 10. Google Scholar

¹¹³ As mentioned supra n. 7, Alberic in the Breviarium cites the writings of Peter Damian as examples of good rhetorical usage (cf. Rockinger, Briefsteller 33). Rockinger, however, refers only to one such citation and fails to identify the passage. In MS Munich lat. 14784, s. xii, fol. 75, in the section De vituperatione, Alberic writes as follows: ‘Item Petri denique Damiani in meretrices: Lepores clericorum, pulpamenta diaboli, proiectio paradysi. Uirus, mencium gladius, aconita bibencium, toxica conuiuarum, materia peccandi, occasio pereundi, gimnasium hostis antiqui, upupe, ulule, noctue, lupe, sanguisuge, Affer, affer sine cessatione dicentes (Prov. 30.15). Scorta, prostibulum, suauia uolutabra porcorum pinguium, cubiculum immundorum spirituum, nimphe, sirene, lamie, et si quid portenti uel prodigii reperitur, quod uestro competens nomini iudicetur.’ This passage is taken from Damian's Opusc. 18²: Contra clericorum intemperantiam 7 (PL 145.410 A). On fol. 81^v, speaking of various styles of epistolary salutation, Alberic notes the following: ‘Prologus inferioris persone ad quemlibet abbatem precipuum: Monachorum archangelo Desiderio, A. cum Michahele consortium.’ Damian twice addressed Desiderius as Archangelus monachorum: Opusc. 33 (PL 145.559 D); Opusc. 34 (PL 145.571 D). While giving examples for the section De mutatione verborum (beginning at fol. 95^v), Alberic again quoted Damian: (fol. 98^v) ‘Petri Damiani uerbain uxores clericorum : Uos tigrides impie, quarum nesciunt preter humanum sanguinem cruenta ora sitire. Uos arpie, que sacrificium domini circumuolantes (circumuolatis : MS) arripitis, eosque qui Deo oblati fuerant crudeliter deuorastis’ (= Opusc. 18². 7 [PL 145.410B]). Still another use of Damian's works occurs in the Breviarium (MS Munich lat. 14784, fol. 90–90^v), quoting from Epist. 3.6 (PL 144.294 D) with some alteration: ‘Kadolus uel Clemens sancte persecutores ecclesie, discipline euersores apostolice, salutis inimici humane, inquam peccati radices, diaboli precones, antichristi apostoli, sagitte nimirum de pharetra satane producte, Assur uirge, Bilial progenies, perdicionis filii, qui aduersantur et extolluntur super omne quod dicitur aut collitur Deus (2 Thess. 2.4), ueluti teterrimi dracones, aut sufflant aut fetore uenenate pecunie mentes hominum fedant, fidemque multorum uento perfidie, uento uacilante, noui heresiarche perturbant…’. Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ For a discussion of this problem and its implications for the theory under consideration in this study, cf. infra 120ff. Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ A major part of the conjecture would include, in addition to the actual sending of the poems, also the purpose for which they were sent. It might be further presumed that Alberic was merely seeking the approval of his former teacher. That such a practice of sending verses to esteemed friends was in vogue in the eleventh century is evidenced in Damian's own writings. See, e.g., Carm. 186 (PL 145.966 B; MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 360):Google Scholar

or Opusc. 49 (PL 145.732 A): ‘Omnes autem sanctos fratres monasterii tui mea vice saluta. Charissimos autem mihi fratres, Boninum et Petrum, si solito more videris aliquando excelsius canere, hoc distichon meo nomine in eorum manibus pone:

or Opusc. 34 (PL 145.584 A) to abbot Desiderius, which Damian concludes with the following: ‘Scribite, si placet, distichon istud in refectorio sub pedibus apostolorum:

or Carm. 180 (PL 145.965 D; MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 360) with its reference to reciprocation:

These examples should suffice to prove the practice, at least in one party to the correspondence. Was Alberic merely imitating the master? And in following the practice of Damian he may have suffered the fate which Damian described in a remark to Desiderius (Opusc. 33 [PL 145. 572 B]): ‘Nam ubi distat opus a labiis, foedatur nomen auctoris.’

¹¹⁶ Cf. Dressler, , Petrus Damiani 172–173; Blum, St. Peter Damian 35.Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ No reference to Damian's poetry is found in John of Lodi, Vita Petri Damiani (PL 144.114–146), nor in the same author's Liber testimoniorum veteris et novi testamentorum (PL 145.987–1176). This is particularly significant, since on John's own admission, he was almost the sole companion of the old prior during Damian's last days: ‘tanto patri licet in extremis pene temporibus, individuus comes inhaeserim’ (PL 144.114 G). Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ For the recent discussion of Peter Damian as a poet, cf. supra n. 17. Perhaps the oldest literary claim for Damian as an author of hymns is Lippomani, A., Vitae sanctorum VIII (Rome 1560); on which, cf. Prolegomena (PL 144.189–190). Lippomani's testimony, however, is suspect in view of his reputation as an uncritical editor, responsible for the inclusion of nineteen spurious sermons within the Opera omnia of Peter Damian. On which, cf. Wilmart, A. ‘Une lettre de Pierre, S. Damien à l'impératrice Agnès,’ Revue bénédictine 44 (1932) 125 n. 1; Blum, St. Peter Damian 42–44. Lippomani apparently used MS Vat. Pietro, S. D. 206, s. xiv, which, while including poetry in conjunction with Damian's prose works, does not directly ascribe the poetry to him.Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ Cf. supra n. 71 and the literature there listed. Google Scholar

¹²⁰ PL 145.917–986. Google Scholar

¹²¹ Carm. 211 (PL 145.968 C) seems to be only an incomplete variant of Carm. 165 (PL 145.962 D). If so, MS Urbin. lat. 503 has only one carmen not found in the other MSS of the eleventh century.Google Scholar

¹²² Carm. 77, 78, 79, 97, 98, 117, 118, 122; for which, cf. supra n. 68.Google Scholar

¹²³ There is considerable duplication in the editing of the carmina by Gaetani. By actual count, after duplications have been excluded, Gaetani's 227 carmina shrink to 211. Google Scholar

¹²⁴ Fol. 368. The two papal pieces are JL 4312 and 4697, both privileges, for Damian's hermitage at Ocri and for the church of St. Luke founded by him at Gubbio. Jaffé cites Mittarelli, Ann. camald. 3.242, 2.239 and PL 179.225, 146.1396 as editions. Google Scholar

¹²⁵ Epist. 8.15 (PL 144.497–498).Google Scholar

¹²⁶ Fol. 371. A striking parallelism in text exists in a passage from the Commendatio (fol. 371^v = PL 144.498 B) and from the Oratio ad crucem (fol. 369 = Carm. 25, PL 145. 926 D). In the Oratio the passage reads: ‘Reduc me ad pascue tue semper amena uirentia…’; in the Commendatio: ‘Constituat te Christus filius Dei uiui intra paradisi sui semper amena uirentia.’ This parallelism would seem to indicate the same author for both works. But the position of the Commendatio in MS Vat. lat. 3797, so far removed from the other prose of Damian, makes one suspect its authenticity. The present author found the Commendatio animae also in MS Vat. lat. 4928, s. xii in. script. Benevent. (cf. Lowe, E. A., Beneventan Script 363), without ascription to Peter Damian. Fol. 313^v-314^v: ‘Antequam anima egrediatur de corpore dicit sacerdos. Inc. Commendamus te omnipotenti deo, Karissime frater, eique te cuius es creatura. Des. contemplationis diuine dulcedine potiaris in secula seculorum. Amen.’ Cf. also Blum, St. Peter Damian 38 n. 6; Leclercq, H., ‘Recommandation,’ DACL 14 (1947) 2163.Google Scholar

¹²⁷ Cf. supra 106 ff. The items in this group not repeated are Nos. 5, 10, 31, 38–43. No. 5 (Carm. 225) might have been considered a continuation of No. 4 (Carm. 224); Nos. 10 and 31 are each a divisio of a preceding hymn in their original location (fol. 363^v, 365^v), and would not require repetition for the sake of the melody. Google Scholar

¹²⁸ Carm. 48, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56 (PL 145.935–937).Google Scholar

¹²⁹ Opusc. 19.3 (PL 145.427 D): ‘Cui scilicet assertioni etiam Prudentius, nobilis versificator, in hymnorum suorum opusculis attestatur.’ For Damian's knowledge of the Roman poets, cf. Dressler, Petrus Damiani 186–187.Google Scholar

¹³⁰ For a discussion of the Avellana library, cf. Blum, St. Peter Damian 58–63. The twelfth-century catalogue of Fonte Avellana, found in MS Vat. lat. 484, s. xi/xii, fol. 126–127, is in Blum, op. cit. 204–205. The reference here to the works of Prudentius is more than academic. The trochaic tetrameters of the Cathemerinon 9.1–114 and of the Peristephanon 1.1–120 (cf. Thomson, H. J., Prudentius [Loeb Classical Library; Cambridge 1949] I 76–84; II 98–108) may have had decisive influence on the author of the tetralogy examined in this study. Certainly No. 2 De gaudio paradisi (Carm. 226), lines 14–18, shows a verbal dependence on Prudentius, Cath. 5.113–124. While it cannot be proved, aside from Damian's lone reference, that Fonte Avellana possessed the writings of the early Christian poet, Monte Cassino had at least one Prudentius: MS Monte Cassiono 374, s.ix/x (cf. Lowe, E. A., Beneventan Script 350).Google Scholar

¹³¹ Carm. 37 Inc. ‘Unica spes hominum’ (PL 145.931 = AH 48.57; AH 51. 240) and Carm. 65 Inc. ‘Scala thronusque Dei’ (PL 145.940 = AH 48.57–58; AH 51.240) are found in MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 361 and in MS Monte Cassino 358, pp. 401–405. If they are Damian's they bear out the contention above. Furthermore, if they did not appear in MS Monte Cassino 358, their striking similarity in form with Alberic's poem in honor of St. Scholastica, Inc. ‘Sponsa decora Dei’ (cf. supra nn.27, 28) might almost suggest Alberic as their author. Carm. 94 Inc. ‘Spiritus alme, veni perflando dindima nostra’ (PL 145.946–947; AH 48. 58–60), using the same meter, is not found in the three great eleventh-century codices of Damian's works. Dreves (AH 48.60) found it in MS Vat. lat. 1272, s. xi, with the title: Incipiunt versus Petri episcopi in laude sanctorum apostolorum. It also appears in MS Paris, B.N. lat 2584, s. xiv, fol. 164^v-165, entitled: Versus de institution primitiue ecclesie et martiriis apostolorum. The Paris MS, however, contains thirty lines more than the editions of Gaetani and Dreves.Google Scholar

¹³² Only six poems in iambic dimeter are found among his works (Carm. 78, 79, 97, 98, 117, 118) and one in sapphic (Carm. 77). Google Scholar

¹³³ Cf. supra n. 109; Opusc. 50.6: De anima, cum egreditur, quibus dolorum anxietatibus coarctetur (PL 145.737–738). Google Scholar

¹³⁴ The prose of Peter Damian here referred to is a much more immediate source than the similar lines of Prudentius cited supra n. 130. Google Scholar

¹³⁵ The suggestion might also be considered that the Institutio monialis of Damian, written in the summer of 1059 (cf. Blum, St. Peter Damian 202), was the dependent work and that its author borrowed from the tetralogy composed earlier. No hint at such dependence, however, is found in the Institutio monialis. Google Scholar

¹³⁶ Opusc. 50 is found in MS Monte Cassino 358, pp. 361–370, a Beneventan codex of the eleventh century, available to Alberic for purposes mentioned above. It may be only coincidence, but in the Vita et obitus sanctae Scolasticae Alberic hints at a preoccupation with the subjects contained in the tetralogy. The Vita in question, a rhetorical elaboration of St. Gregory the Great's simple account (Dialogi 2.33–34), enlarges on the nocturnal conversation between St. Benedict and his sister and specifically points up the topics discussed (cf. Lentini, Scolastica 235 and MS Vat. lat. 1202): 73. ‘Eandem igitur noctem uterque exegere insomnem, conferentes in invicem de abysso iudiciorum Dei, de superabundantia miserationum eius, de scripturae mysteriis, de divinorum operum sacramentis, de molestiis, de miseriis vitae praesentis, de gaudio, de felicitate perhennis, quis metus in morte sit, quis tremor in iudicis visione, quae in discussione districtio.’ Google Scholar

¹³⁷ Cf. Blum, , St. Peter Damian 61.Google Scholar

¹³⁸ Ed. Heinemann, L., MGH Libelli de lite 1.15–75; PL 145.99–156.Google Scholar

¹³⁹ The verses begin with ‘O quam dura quam horrenda’ (the first line [2] of De penis inferni) and break off in the middle of line 13: ‘Vermes nunquam satiantur, qui cor…’ (cf. infra, Appendix B No. 5.). Without space or capital letter the poem continues: ‘[Serpentinis] armant spiris manus doctas preliis,’ which is line 38 of the Rithmus de die mortis (cf. infra, Appendix B No. 6). Google Scholar

¹ speris = sphaeris ²prospeta M Google Scholar

^a Eucheridii may be a scribal mistake for enchiridii. Otherwise it may be a reference to an unknown grammatical work. For the adjectival form eucheride, cf. supra. Google Scholar

^b This may be a reference to the meter of Phalaecus. Google Scholar

³ exasillabis M ⁴milsella M Google Scholar

^c Cf. Mearns, J., Early Latin Hymnaries 21. From the text it is not clear whether the reference is to the hymn in honor of St. Stephen (AH 23.269; Chevalier, Repertorium 3005), or to the hymn in honor of St. Benedict (AH 14.63; Chevalier 3006).Google Scholar

^d Chevalier 1889; AH 51.140; Mearns 14. Google Scholar

^e The MS reading is quod; but perhaps quot would be more in context. Google Scholar

^f Hymn attributed to St. Peter Damian: Carm. 56 (PL 145.937; AH 48.37); Chevalier 11146; Mearns 53. Cf. also supra n. 54. Google Scholar

^g PL 145.937–938; AH 48.52; Chevalier 13024; Mearns 60. On this hymn, doubtfully ascribed to St. Peter Damian, cf. supra n. 92, 93. Google Scholar

^h Venantius Fortunatos; AH 50.71; Chevalier 14481; Mearns 65. Google Scholar

⁵ XX (viginti) M ⁶viiii M ⁷accidit M ⁸Siadecasillabus M ⁹correpto M ¹⁰Dedecasillabus M ¹¹decassillabis M ¹²aliqua M Google Scholar

ⁱ This first line could not be found in Chevalier. All other exempla, unless otherwise noted, could not be identified. Google Scholar

^j In the context the number should perhaps read xv. Google Scholar

^k Here octo is written in full, suggesting that the previous viiii is a scribal mistake. Google Scholar

^l Paulinus of Aquileia, hymn in honor of SS. Peter and Paul; cf. AH 50.141; Chevalier 6060; Mearns 33. Google Scholar

^m Prudentius, , Cath . 3.1; AH 50.37; Chevalier 12838; Mearns 60.Google Scholar

¹³ Exdecassillabus Μ. (2) The edition of this rhythm is based on the following MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, s. xi, fol. 362 (V); MS Utrecht 263, s. xiv, fol. 59 (U); MS Vat. lat. 1169, s. xiv, fol. 176 (A); MS Vat. lat. 6749, s. xiv, fol. 249 (B); MS Troyes 1612, s. xv, fol. 92 (T); MS Karlsruhe (sine numero; cf. Mone, J., Lateinische Hymnen I [1853] 422–425), s. xv (K); MS Zwolle 434, s. xv (Z); MS Florence, Laur. Conv. Soppr. 957, s. xvi (F); Du, E. Méril, op. cit. 131–135 (D); AH 48.66 (H); AH 51.241 (H’); PL 145.980 (M); PL 145.861 (M’).Google Scholar

2 Ps. 41.3. 8–10 Apoc. 21.21. 12 Apoc. 21.21. 14–18 Prud. Cath. 3.21–25; 3.103; 5.113–124; cf. Petr. Dam. Institutio monialis 15 (PL 145.750A).

21–23 Apoc. 21.23; 22.5. 23 Matth. 13.43. 27 1 Cor. 15.44. 32–34 Aug. De civ. Dei 5.16. 37 1 Cor. 15.54; 2 Cor. 5.4. 38–40 Petr. Dam. Instit. mon. 15 (PL 145.749 B). 44 Matth. 24.28; Luc. 17.37.

50–51 Petr. Dam. Instit. mon. 15 (PL 145.750 A).

(3) MS Sand editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 362 (V); MS Vat. Ottob. 311 add., s. xi (O); AH 48.53 (H); AH 51.240 (H’); PL 145.931 (M).

3 Cf. (35) Hymnus s. Ianuarii (supra 107); AH 51.241, where the wording is identical.

14–16 Col. 2.14. 17 Act. 3.15. 18–19 Matth. 27.51. 23–25 Cf. Aug. Enarr. in Ps. 63.15 (PL 36.767–768). 29–30 1 Cor. 10.1; cf. Ad cenam agni providi, line 3–4 (AH 51.87): ‘Post transitum maris rubri/ Christo canamus principi.’ 31 Col. 3.1. 32–34 1 Cor. 5.7–8. 36 Rom. 6.9.

(4) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 362^v (V); MS Vat. S. D. Pietro 206, s. xiv, fol. 192 (A); MS Vat. lat. 6749, s. xiv, fol. 250 (B); MS Milan, Ambrosian. F. 13 sup., s. xv (C); MS Troyes 1612, s. xv, fol. 91 (T); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 59^v (U); MS Zwolle 434 (Z); AH 48.64 (H); AH 51.241 (H'); PL 145.978 (M).

12 Matth. 24.27. 13–14 Is. 13.10; 2 Pet. 3.12. 18–20 Is. 29.6; Petr. Dam. Instit. mon. 7 (PL 145.740). 22 Dan. 7.9. 23 Luc. 23.30. 27–30 Cf. Petr. Dam. Instit. mon. 7 (PL 145.741 A). 31 Ci. supra (3) Rithmus pascale, line 3.

(5) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 362^v. (V); MS Vat. S. D. Pietro 206, fol. 192

(A); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 250 (B); MS Milan, Ambros. F. 13 sup. (C); MS Vat. lat.202, s. xi, fol. 161 (D); MS Troyes 1612, fol. 91^v (T); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 59^v (U); MS Zwolle 434 (Z); AH 48.65 (H); PL 145.980 (M).

8–10 Petr. Dam. Instit. mon. 12 (PL 145.745 D). 13 Marc. 9.43. 14 Matth. 13.50.

(6) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 363 (V); MS Vat. S. D. Pietro 206, fol. 192 (A); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 250^v (B); MS Milan, Ambros. F. 13 sup. (C); MS Vat. lat.202, fol. 161 (D); MS Troyes 1612, fol. 90 (T); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 59^v (U); MS Zwolle 434 (Z); AH 48.62 (H); PL 145.977 (M).

8–10 Petr. Dam. Instit. mon. 6 (PL 145.738 B). 11–13 Ibid. (PL 145.738 C). 14–16 Ibid. (PL 145.738 G); cf. Prud. Cath. 3.134. 17–19 Ibid. (PL 145.738 AB). 26–28 Ibid. (PL 145.738 D).

44 Eph. 6.12.

(7) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 363 (V); MS Vat. S. D. Pietro 206, fol. 192 (A); MS Milan, Ambros. F. 13 sup. (C); AH 48.60 (H); PL 145.971 (M).

12 Rom. 7.23. 18 Luc. 18.13.

42 1 Tim. 6.16. 49 Luc. 7.14. 51 Matth. 14.31. 54 Luc. 7.44. 55 Luc. 18.14. 56 Luc. 23.43.

(15) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 364 (V); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 246^v (B); MS Darmstadt 521, s. xv (D); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 58 (U); AH 48.30 (H); PL 145.933 (M). For ascensa, cf. Du Cange 1.417. 11 Uenitus, p. part. saec. vii; cf. Baxter and Johnson, Medieval Latin Word-List 450. 13 Luc. 15.5. 19 Gen. 49.26.

(16) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 364 (V); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 246^v (B); MS Darmstadt 521 (D); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 58 (U); AH 48.47 (H); AH 51.240 (H’); PL 145.941 (M).

6 Ezech. 34.14; cf. supra n. 126. 18 Act. 5.15. 20–21 Act. 9.36–40. 22–25 Act. 12.6–10. 26 For a discussion of this doxology, cf. supra n. 76. This hymn represents the earlier, legend-free tradition of hymns in honor of St. Peter; on which, cf. J. Szövérffy, ‘The Legends of St. Peter in Medieval Latin Hymns,’ Traditio 10 (1954) 303–306.

(17) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 364 (V); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 246^V (B); MS Darmstadt 521 (D); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 58 (U); AH 48.47 (H); PL 145.942 (M).

2 Cf. the Aurea luce et decore roseo, attributed to Elpis, line 13 (AH 51.216–219; Chevalier 1596; Analecta Bollandiana 32 [1913] Appendix 42). 4 Is. 60.8; for nubs, cf. A. Souter, Glossary of Later Latin to 600 A.D. (Oxford 1949) 268.

11 2 Cor. 12.2. 14 Luc.8.11. 18 Act. 13.47.

(18) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 364^v (V); MS Florence, Laur. Conv. Soppr. 524, s. xi, fol. 119^v (A); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 246^v (B); MS Vat. Rossian. IX. 1, s. xii/xiii (R); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 58 (U); AH 48.39 (H); PL 145.951 (M).

10 Cf. Petr. Dam. Sermo 31 (PL 144.671 D); see also M. Bodet, ‘Apollinaire,’ DHGE 3 (1924) 957–959. 11 Ibid.

(19) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 364^v (V); MS Florence, Laur. Conv. Soppr. 524, fol. 120 (A); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 247 (B); MS Vat. Rossian. IX.1 (R); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 58 (U); AH 48.40 (H); PL 145.951 (M).

12 Cf. Petr. Dam. Sermo 31 (PL 144.672 C).

(20) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 364^v (V); MS Florence, Laur. Conv. Soppr. 524, fol. 120^v (A); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 247 (B); MS Vat. Rossian, IX.1 (R); MS Perugia, Capit. 16, s. xi (P); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 58 (U); AH 48.40 (H); PL 145.951 (incomplete) (M). 11 Eccli. 15.5. 12 Cf. Exod. 6.7. 14–17 Cf. Petr. Dam. Sermo 31 (PL 144.671 B).

(23) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 365 (V); MS Florence, Laur. Conv. Soppr. 524, fol. 125 (A); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 247^v (B); MS Vat. S. D. Pietro 206, fol. 74^v (C); MS Darmstadt 521 (D); MS Milan, Ambros. F. 13 sup. (E); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 58^v (U); AH 48.32 (H); PL 145.934 (M).

6 Cf. Gen. 28.12. 15 Prov. 9.1. 18–22 Cf. Petr. Dam. Sermo 61 (PL 144.847 B); Ps. 77.25.

(24) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 365 (V); MS Florence, Laur. Conv. Soppr 524, fol. 125^v (A); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 247^v (B); MS Milan, Ambros. F. 13 sup. (C); MS Darmstadt 521 (D); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 58^v (U); AH 48.33 (H); AH 51.240 (H'); PL 145.935 (M).

5 For dragma as an ornament, cf. and Baxter Johnson, Word-List 144; see also Du Cange 3.192. 7 Ps. 77.23. 12 Luc. 1.31. 15 1 Cor. 6.20. 19 Luc. 1.35.

(25) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 365 (V); MS Florence, Laur. Conv. Soppr. 524, fol. 126 (A); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 247^v (B); MS Verona, Cath. cap. 109, s. xi (C); MS Darmstadt 521 (D); MS Milan, Ambros. F. 13 sup. (E); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 58^v (U); AH 48.33 (H); PL 145.936 (M).

4–5 Cant. 6.9. 9 Ps. 109.3. 17 Matth. 16.27.

(26) MSS and editions: MS Vat. lat. 3797, fol. 365 (V); MS Florence, Laur. Conv. Soppr. 524, fol. 129^v (A); MS Vat. lat. 5776, s. xi, fol. 100^v (B); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 248 (C); MS

Darmstadt 521 (D); MS Verona, Capit. 103 (96), s. xii/xiii, fol. 134 (E); MS Verona, Capit. 108 (101), ca. 1200, fol. 197^v (F); MS Rome, Angelic. CV 12, s. xiv (G); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 58^v (U); AH 48.30 (H); PL 145.930 (M). 6 Act. 3.15. 9 Jo. 12.36; 1 Thess. 5.5. 12 Matth. 25.32. 18 Levit. 7.2. 23 Ps. 23.8–10.

(27) MSS and editions: MSVat. lat. 3797, fol. 365 (V); MS Florence, Laur. Conv. Soppr. 524, fol. 130 (A); MS Vat. lat. 5776, fol. 101^v (B); MS Vat. lat. 6749, fol. 248 (C); MS Darmstadt 521 (D); MS Verona, Capit. 103 (96), fol. 134^v (E); MS Verona, Capit. 108 (101), fol. 198 (F); MS Oxford, Bodl. Miscell. liturg. 137, s. xiii (G); MS Utrecht 263, fol. 58^v (U); AH 48.31 (H); PL 145.930 (M). 4 For baiula, cf. Du Cange 1.525; J. F. Niermeyer, Mediae latinitatis lexicon minus (Leiden 1954) 77–78.

7 Jo. 12.32. 8–9 Jo. 14.30. 11 For cyrographum as an indenture, cf. Niermeyer 176. (Scol.) This edition follows MS Vat. lat. 1202, s. xi, fol. 259^v-262 (V); it also collates the readings of Mabillon, Acta SS. O.S.B. 1 (ed. 1935) 42–44 (A).

12 Cf. Greg. Dial. 2.33.

26 Cf. Albericus, Vita et obitus sanctae Scolasticae (Lentini, Scolastica 235). 34

For quesito, beg often, cf. A. Souter, Glossary of Later Latin 337.

60 Cf. Greg. Dial. 2.34. 68–71 Cf. P. Meyvaert, ‘Peter the Deacon and the Tomb of St. Benedict,’ Revue bénédictine 65 (1955) 42–44. The evidence, here provided by Alberic, bears out the older tradition of one tomb and seems altogether unrelated to the invention of the body of St. Benedict in 1068.