¹ Some of the leading names in prophecy studies have referred to the commentary, but never more than in passing. See Grundmann, Herbert, “Liber de Flore: Eine Schrift der Franziskaner-Spiritualen aus dem Anfang des 14. Jahrhunderts,” in idem, Ausgewählte Aufsätze. Teil 2: Joachim von Fiore (Stuttgart, 1977), 101–65, at 107, 141 (the original date of publication was 1929); Reeves, Marjorie, The Influence of Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages: A Study in Joachimism (Oxford, 1969), 252–53, 418–19; eadem, “Some Popular Prophecies from the Fourteenth to the Seventeenth Centuries,” Studies in Church History 8 (1971): 107–34, at 134; Potestà, Gian Luca, Angelo Clareno: Dai Poveri Eremiti ai Fraticelli (Rome, 1990), 83; McGinn, Bernard, '“Pastor Angelicus': Apocalyptic Myth and Political Hope in the Fourteenth Century,” in Santi e Santitd nel Secolo XIV: Atti del XV Convegno Internazionale, Assisi, 15–16–17 ottobre 1987 (Assisi, 1989), 221–51, at 247–48 (reprinted with the same pagination in idem, Apocalypticism in the Western Tradition [Great Yarmouth, 1994]). The most recent brief account is Hannes Möhring, Der Weltkaiser der Endzeit (Stuttgart, 2000), 277. We refrain from enumerating mistakes in these treatments, most of which derive from imperfect knowledge of the data. Heinrich Finke published parts of the text (about half of it) from a single manuscript (then in Vienna, now in Budapest): idem, Aus den Tagen Bonifaz VIII. (Münster, 1902), 218–22.Google Scholar

Although the authors planned this study together and criticized each other's contributions, part 1 is mainly the work of Robert Lerner and part 2 that of Matthias Kaup. Robert Lerner's research was supported by a Max Planck Research Award for International Cooperation. Matthias Kaup's German was generously translated into English by James Stuart Brice (Universität Konstanz). We wish to thank Prof. Mirella Ferrari (Milan) for the paleographical evaluation of our manuscripts.Google Scholar

² Analysis of the four surviving manuscripts reveals the existence of two transmissions, γ and δ. (See our Ratio Editionis.) Our presentation depends on γ.Google Scholar

³ Gentile's account is fully reliable in its reference to Arnald of Villanova's treatise and the prophecy, “Ve mundo,” within it. See the edition by Espelt, Josep Perarnau i, “El text primitiu del De mysterio cymbalorum ecclesiae d'Arnau de Vilanova,” Arxiu de textos Catalans antics 7/8 (1989–90): 7–169, at 102–3.Google Scholar

⁴ Here and throughout we refer to line numbers in our edition of the commentary. The chronological indices will be examined in detail below.Google Scholar

⁵ The two manuscripts that contain the cognomen are F₁ and F₂. (For the sigla, see the Ratio Editionis, below.) The two other known copies, B and A, lack the cognomen. Since B descends from the archetype and A belongs to the revised transmission, δ, the cognomen in the antigraph to F₁ and F₂, which belongs to the δ group, must derive from a step subsequent to A or first appeared in the antigraph. Marjorie Reeves, Influence of Prophecy (n. 2), accepted the identification “de Fulgineo” in F₁ (she did not know F₂) without considering whether it could have been in the archetype.Google Scholar

⁶ For biographical data, see Vasoli, Cesare in Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani 9 (1967), 173–74, and Grendler, Paul F., Schooling in Renaissance Italy (Baltimore, 1989), 26 (Vasoli and Grendler complement each other). Luca Bernardi taught in San Gimignano, Volterra, Colle Valdelsa, Siena, and Florence.Google Scholar

⁷ Luca Bernardi copied the fourteenth-century physician Gentile of Foligno's Consilium in Colle Valdelsa in 1478: see Thorndike, Lynn, A History of Magic and Experimental Science 3 (New York, 1934), 242–43 n. 36. On Gentile of Foligno the physician, Siraisi, Nancy G., Tadeo Alderotti and His Pupils (Princeton, 1981), xxi, n. 4, citing further literature. Gentile the physician could not have been the author of our prophetic commentary since he was not a “frater,” and since as a physician he could hardly have been opposed to the study of natural philosophy, as the author was (159–74).Google Scholar

⁸ On the term “frater” customarily designating a mendicant friar, see Bériou, Nicole, L'avènement des maîtres de la Parole (Paris, 1998), 181.Google Scholar

⁹ A sustained biographical account of Gentile of Foligno is lacking. See provisionally Clareno, Angelo, Opera, I: Epistole, ed. von Auw, Lydia (Rome, 1980), p. xxx, n. 1, and for the context of his becoming socius of the Augustinian prior general William of Cremona, Mariani, Ugo, Chiesa e stato nei teologi Agostiniani del secolo XIV (Rome, 1957), 106–7.Google Scholar

¹⁰ See the autobiographical passage from Simone's De gestis Domini Salvatoris cited in Mattioli, Nicola, Il Beato Simone Fidati da Cascia , Antologia Agostiniana, 2 (Rome, 1898), 4–5, 7–8. Mattioli assumed that the holy man who persuaded Simone to abandon philosophical studies was Angelo Clareno because Angelo was known to have had amicable relations with Simone later on: see Clareno, Angelo, Opera, 115, 230, 231, and Mattioli, , Il Beato Simone, 336–39. But Mary Germane McNeil, Simone Fidate and His De gestis Domini Salvatoris (Washington, D.C., 1950), 9–10, explains that the Augustinian scholar W. Heppner found marginal notes dating from the sixteenth century in the 1533 edition of Simone's De gestis that identified the holy man as Gentile of Foligno. This identification is persuasive because Foligno and Cascia are close to each other (about 35 kilometers apart) and because Simone soon entered Gentile's Augustinian order. Another reference to Simone's being led away from philosophy appears in a vita written by his secretary and disciple, John of Salerno, an Augustinian, who refers to the man who worked the conversion as a “brother”; see Mattioli, Il Beato Simone, 19.Google Scholar

¹¹ Gentile of Foligno the physician was not a “frater.” Cardinal Gentile of Montefiore died too early (1312) to have referred to events of 1328 and 1331/32 mentioned in the commentary. Gentile of Spoleto, a Franciscan lay brother, must be excluded because his dates of activity (1350, 1355) are too late and because as a lay brother he would hardly have studied in Paris: on him see Sensi, Mario, Le Osservanze Francescane nell'Italia Centrale (Rome, 1985), 32–35.Google Scholar

¹² Letter 18, from Avignon, in Clareno, Angelo, Opera, 95–104; analysis in Potestà, Angelo Clareno, 116–19. The preferable date of April 1318, would put the letter's treatment of papal primacy and eschatology into the context of John XXII's attack on Franciscan Spirituals and their associates in the bulls Sancta Romana (December 1317) and Gloriosam ecclesiam (January 1318). The first question to which Angelo responded, on papal primacy, was certainly transmitted by Gentile on behalf of someone else. Potestà, Angelo Clareno, 116, assumes the same for the second, but whereas Angelo refers to the first question as coming from “amicus tuus et meus” (97, line 1), he refers to the second as a question “quod postulas” (101, line 26) and then refers to “tue interrogationis” (102, line 1). (Reeves, Influence of Prophecy, 252, wants to establish Gentile of Foligno's interest in prophecy on the basis of another letter written by Angelo Clareno, but this one is addressed to Philip of Majorca, not Gentile of Foligno.) Google Scholar

¹³ Courtenay, William, “The Parisian Franciscan Community in 1303,” Franciscan Studies 53 (1997 for 1993): 155–73.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Two pieces of information in Chartularium universitatis Parisiensis, ed. Denifle, H. and Chatelain, E. (Paris, 1891), 2:85 with n. 3 must be read together. The first is a statute of the general chapter of the Augustinian Order of May 1300 specifying that there should always be four theological bachelors in the Parisian studium, and naming one of them as a certain James of Orte. The second, an extract from a document in the Vatican archives, reveals that when James of Orte was a bachelor in the Augustinian studium and the master was the noted James of Viterbo, another bachelor was “Frater Johannes Gentilis de Roma.” The year must have been 1300 because James of Orte then resided in Paris and James of Viterbo's Parisian regency ended then. For the course of study in the Augustinian Order, Kunzelmann, A., Geschichte der deutschen Augustiner-Eremiten, 1: Das dreizehnte Jahrhundert (Würzburg, 1969), 249–50. Five years of theological study (most often pursued in a regional studium) were required before becoming baccalarius, and customarily a period of service as lector in a provincial cloister intervened. Afterwards four or five years as bachelor preceded regency, obtained at or not long after the age of thirty-five. Thus we may posit that Gentile pursued his first period of theological study in his early twenties, became a lector for a few years after that, and then was sent to Paris at about age thirty to prepare for a possible regency (several were called, but few chosen) at age thirty-five.Google Scholar

¹⁵ On Augustinian names, Maier, Anneliese, “Handschriftliches zu Arnaldus de Villanova,” Analecta Sacra Tarraconensia 21 (1948): 53–74, at 66: “diese führen ja oft mehrere Namen (nach dem Geburtsort, nach ihrem Kloster und gegebenenfalls auch den eigenen Familiennamen).” The possibility that the “Gentilis” in “Johannes Gentilis” might be a genitive and hence a family name cannot be excluded but even if that were true Gentile of Foligno might subsequently have gone over to the use of his family name.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Gentile of Foligno was definitely attached to the Augustinian convent of Foligno in 1310 (see n. 29). We do not know his birthdate, but since he died no earlier than 1337 and is not likely to have been much over seventy at that earliest possible date, he is unlikely to have been born much before 1267. Assuming that he was a theological bachelor in his early thirties on the grounds of the customary course of study (n. 14), the years around 1300 fit quite well for the bachelorship.Google Scholar

¹⁷ For the events recounted here concerning Arnald of Villanova and their background, see Finke, , Aus den Tagen, 190–226; Lerner, Robert E., “The Pope and the Doctor,” Yale Review 78 (1988–89): 62–79; idem, “Ecstatic Dissent,” Speculum 67 (1992): 33–57, at 42–44; and Ziegler, Joseph, Medicine and Religion c. 1300: The Case of Arnau de Vilanova (Oxford, 1998), 24–26.Google Scholar

¹⁸ The treatise, De adventu Antichristi, is edited by Perarnau, , “El text primitiu,” 134–69.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Arnald's dedicatory letters accompanying twelve copies of his treatise have been preserved; see the study and edition by Artau, Joaquin Carreras, “Del epistolario espiritual de Arnaldo de Vilanova,” Estudios Franciscanos 49 (1948): 79–94, 391–406, at 392–96, 397–99, 405–6.Google Scholar

²⁰ Arnald's dedicatory letters to the Dominicans and Franciscans both support a dating of 1301, for he refers in the former to first publishing his ideas “iam anno preterito” (Carreras, “Del epistolario,” 393), and in the latter to the year of writing as the first year of the fourteenth century (ibid., 396). Since Genoa was evidently a waystation for Arnald's return from Rome to Languedoc, it would have been most appropriate to send everything meant for Paris from there.Google Scholar

²¹ This is in Arnald's letter to Pope Benedict XI, ed. Espelt, Josep Perarnau i, Arxiu de textos Catalans antics 10 (1991): 201–14, at 206, lines 379–81.Google Scholar

²² The copy of Arnald's in question is Vat. lat. 3824 (Perarnau's V). With great probability this was the exemplar used by the Roman scribes to make the outgoing copies, for it contains two unique readings that reappear in two independent witnesses to the Parisian transmission (referred to in the next footnote) as well as in Gentile's copy. The readings in question are Perarnau, , “El text primitiu,” 103, line 971 replecione; line 976 Aristotilis Google Scholar

²³ The Saint Victor copy of De cymbalis ecclesie survives as BNF, MS lat. 15033, fols. 200r–241r. The Franciscan and Dominican copies were lost in the French Revolution but a witness to the Franciscan copy survives in the second edition of Hugo de Novocastro's treatise on Antichrist, De victoria Christi contra Antichristum completed in Paris in 1319. See the incunabulum: Nürnberg, Sensenschmidt, J., 1471, lib. 2, cap. 36 (unpaginated). The incunabulum has numerous readings which diverge from Gentile's text, but of course there is no way of knowing how corrupt it might be without reference to the best manuscripts of Hugo's treatise.Google Scholar

²⁴ See Arnald's addendum of 1300 to his De adventu Antichristi , ed. Perarnau, , 166. (The theologian appears to have been Arnald of Toulouse, O.E.S.A.: see Maier, , “Handschriftliches zu Arnaldus de Villanova,” 66, in which case this would have been Gentile of Foligno's own theological master: the possibility of a student delighting in the embarrassment of his master surely cannot be excluded.) Another dramatic twist would soon follow. In 1303, when Philip the Fair turned his guns on Boniface VIII, one of the charges against the pope was that he had “approved of a book by Master Arnald of Villanova, which contains heresy or smacks of it, [after it was] reproved, condemned, and burned by the bishop of Paris and the masters of the Faculty of Theology in Paris, and similarly had been publicly reproved, condemned, and burned by Boniface … but was later rewritten with the same faults.” See Chartularium (n. 14), 90.Google Scholar

²⁵ It may be pointed out that Gentile of Foligno's favorable view of Arnald of Villanova was shared by Tuscan fraticelli. See a writing of fraticelli provenance that refers to Arnald as “quel santo huomo illuminato di spirito profetico”: Rusconi, Roberto, L'attesa della fine (Rome, 1979), 86 n. 7.Google Scholar

²⁶ Perarnau 70, lines 279–81; 96, lines 826–30.Google Scholar

²⁷ Perarnau 64, lines 182–87; 69–70, lines 270–78. Additionally, in his dedicatory letter to the Victorines, Arnald praised them for eschewing the “useless chatter of disputation” in favor of contemplation: ed. Carreras, , 398.Google Scholar

²⁸ Courtenay, William, “Between Pope and King: The Parisian Letters of Adhesion of 1303,” Speculum 71 (1996): 577–605, at 602, infers that Augustinian friars from the provinces of Rome and Spoleto probably left the Parisian convent on this occasion. It is certain that no “Gentile” subscribed to the list of those who acceded to Philip the Fair.Google Scholar

²⁹ Sensi, Mario, Storie di Bizzoche tra Umbria e Marche (Rome, 1995), 283 n. 74, shows that a “Frater Gentile” witnessed a document in Foligno at that time and infers (265–66) that Gentile was associated with Angela of Foligno before the latter's death in 1309. (Sensi, , Le Osservanze Francescane, 283 n. 75, locates a “fr. Gentile Carusi” in Foligno in 1300, but this must have been another Gentile.) Google Scholar

³⁰ Clareno, , Opera, 95–104, 109–14, 229–32.Google Scholar

³¹ Ibid., 108–9; discussion by Potestà, Angelo Clareno, 124. Francesco di Norcia probably had known Gentile before he left for Avignon with Angelo since “Norcia” indicates that he was from Umbria.Google Scholar

³² von Auw, Lydia, Angelo Clareno el les spirituels Italiens (Rome, 1979), 240; Gribomont, J., “La Scala Paradisi, Jean de Raïthou et Ange Clareno,” Studia monastica 2 (1960): 345–58, at 353.Google Scholar

³³ Potestà, Gian Luca, “Gli studi su Angelo Clareno,” Rivista di storia e letteratura religiosa 25 (1989): 111–43, at 119–20 n. 53, and 140–41 n. 137.Google Scholar

³⁴ Texts and commentary in Accrocca, Felice, Angelo Clareno: Seguire Cristo povero e crocifisso (Padua, 1994), 40–42, 139–50.Google Scholar

³⁵ Potestà, Angelo Clareno, 300, 308. A mistaken assumption that Gentile died during the plague year of 1348 (e.g. ibid., 299, and elsewhere) depends on a misreading of Perini, D. A., Bibliographia Augustiniana cum notis biographicis. Scriptores Itali (Florence, 1931), 2:86, who confusingly reports this fact for the other Gentile of Foligno, the physician.Google Scholar

³⁶ Ed. Perarnau, , “El text primitiu,” 101–2, lines 934–46.Google Scholar

³⁷ On the “bat” as King of Aragon, see n. 44 below.Google Scholar

³⁸ Arnald was associated with the early circulation of other arcane prophetic texts — the Oraculum Cyrilli, and the Liber Horoscopus . See Lerner, Robert E., “On the Origins of the Earliest Latin Pope Prophecies,” in Fälschungen im Mittelalter 5, MGH Schriften 33, 5 (Hanover, 1988), 611–35, at 630–31 n. 45. Could it be that a clever forger fed him materials in the knowledge that he would pounce on them?.Google Scholar

³⁹ Gentile of Foligno's copy of the prophecy diverges here from the original in making the bat identical with “the mosquito of Spain.” (It will be seen that Gentile frequently made tendentious changes, but this one appears to be a simple error.) The bat of the Spanish section is most likely identical with the bat of the earlier Greek section, a figure who heals the Eastern Schism. In that case, his appearance is out of chronological order. In any event, the emphasis in “Ve mundo's” Greek section is on chastisement.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Smalley, Beryl, “Stephen Langton and the Four Senses of Scripture,” Speculum 6 (1931): 60–76, at 71.Google Scholar

⁴¹ A contrast is presented by the nearly contemporary commentary on “Ve mundo” written in 1354 by John of Rupescissa. See on this provisionally Bignami-Odier, Jeanne, Études sur Jean de Roquetaillade (Johannes de Rupescissa) (Paris, 1952), 130–39, 242, or substantially the same account in Histoire Littéraire de la France 41 (1981): 134–41, 228–29. Rupescissa, who called his commentary Breviloquium de oneribus orbis, glossed almost every word. He also adhered scrupulously to the text he received rather than tampering with some of the language, as did Gentile. Matthias Kaup is currently completing a critical edition of Rupescissa's Breviloquium de oneribus orbis Google Scholar

⁴² The changes must be Gentile's own rather than descending from an earlier tradition, for two reasons. First they do not match variants in any of the several other known transmissions of “Ve mundo,” including those that are otherwise closest to Gentile's own copy. (These would be the copy supervised by Arnald of Villanova, Vat. lat. 3824; the two copies that otherwise represent the Parisian transmission: BNF lat. 15033 and de Novocastro, Hugo, De victoria Christi — both as n. 23; and Zagreb, University Library, MS MR 154, fol. 80v^a–b.) In addition the changes must be Gentile's own because they form a consistent basis for his own lines of interpretation.Google Scholar

⁴³ On the phenomenon of small alterations of graphemes to achieve tendentious changes in the meaning of prophetic texts, see Lerner, Robert E., The Powers of Prophecy (Berkeley, 1983), passim.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ The bat in the prophecy's penultimate section (II, 10) arises from Spain. The armorial bearings of the crown of Aragon included a strange creature for the crest that looked like a winged dragon or a bat. See Aurell, Martin, “Messianisme royal de la Couronne d'Aragon (14e–15e siècles),” Annales: Histoire, Sciences Sociales 52 (1997): 119–55, at 135. For the glossing of the bat of “Ve mundo” as a king of Aragon (particularly in regard to the bat's appearance in the penultimate messianic section) from the time of John of Rupescissa to that of Ferdinand of Aragon, see Lerner, Robert E., “Medieval Prophecy and Politics,” Annali dell'Istituto Trentino di Cultura 25 (1999): 417–32, at 425–31.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ For evidence that the “rex apum” (king of the bees) in a later section of “Ve mundo” referred to the king of France, see n. 53 below. See also Rupescissa's commentary on “Ve mundo,” Madrid, Biblioteca de la Real Academia de la Lengua, MS 18, fols. 76r–86r, at fol. 77v: “apes … sunt Franci de Neapoli.” Google Scholar

⁴⁶ An uncertainty as to whether Gentile understood “Sicily” to be the island kingdom of Trinacria or the mainland kingdom of Naples is compounded by the uncertainty as to whether he interpreted the “burning” of Sicily by the kings of Aragon in bono or in malo. Thus he could have meant that the kings of Aragon would be chastisers of mainland Sicily as allies of a good emperor at the time of the great reform of the Church, or else (a Guelph reading) he could have meant that while already oppressing Trinacria the kings of Aragon were going to oppress it further.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Nash, Ernest, A Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Rome, 2d ed. (New York, 1968), 2:191.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ We assume that Gentile was referring to the fall of Nicea in 1331 because of his immediately following reference to the campaign of Philip of Taranto's army in Epirus, datable to 1331/32. On the fall of Nicea, which gave the Turks almost all of Asia Minor, see Nicol, Donald M., The Last Centuries of Byzantium, 1261–1453, 2d ed. (Cambridge, 1972), 170–71. It may be noted, however, that whereas Gentile referred to the horrible murder or enslavement of Christians, the Turks took no reprisals against Nicea's inhabitants.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Nicol, Donald M., The Despotate of Epirus, 1267–1479 (Cambridge, 1984), 97–98.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Manuscript B leaves blank space between the existing commentary on the Roman section and the following section. Apparently the scribe thought that there should be more commentary here and considered his exemplar to be defective. Nevertheless, the absence of such commentary in both B and δ shows that it was also absent in the archetype.Google Scholar

⁵¹ On Sciarra Colonna's creation of a Roman republic in league with the emperor Ludwig of Bavaria and the short-lived schism of Nicholas V, see Mollat, Guillaume, The Popes at Avignon, trans. Love, J. (New York, 1963), 208–19. In a letter of 25 August 1330, Angelo Clareno termed Nicholas “ille Petrus fictus,” a phrase close to Gentile's “papa fictus”: Angelo, Opera, 142, lines 13–14.Google Scholar

⁵² Gentile's account of this prediction is sufficiently circumstantial to lend it credence. A prediction that the curia would be transferred to Gallia fits best for the year 1303 when Philip the Fair was seeking a heresy trial for Boniface VIII. It is difficult to determine who the “illustrious man” might have been. Although Gentile stated that he was “an aged member of a religious order and master of theology,” no Augustinian theological master fills the bill. The Franciscan Spiritual Raymond Geoffroi is the best guess because he was born before 1246, was a master of theology, and was in Paris on at least one occasion during the pontificate of Boniface VIII: see Péano, Pierre, “Raymond Geoffroi, Ministre général et défenseur des Spirituels,” Picenum Seraphicum 11 (1974): 190–203, at 192, 200.Google Scholar

⁵³ Pinoteau, Hervé Baron, “Survol de la symbolique de l'Etat français,” in XVIII. Internationaler Kongress für Genealogie und Heraldik: 5.–9. September 1988, Innsbruck (Thaur/Tirol, 1989), 451–58, at 455.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ See John of Rupescissa (n. 45) fol. 79r: “Septimum onus lugubre istud est in quo pungit gloriosus spiritus prophecie inclitum principem imperatorem Gallicum, et affligi demonstrat, heu dolor, graviter totum regnum Franchorum.” See also the Parisian canonist and abbot of Jumièges, Simon du Bosc, who compiled a prophetic anthology around 1400, and whose copy lists the names of regions (or topics) next to their respective sections thus: Syria, Grecia, Cecilia, Roma, Ytalia, Germania, Francia, Universitas, Hibernia, Hyspania, Antichristus. On Simon, see Millet, Hélène, “Ecoute et usage des prophéties par les prélats pendant le Grand Schisme d'Occident,” in Les textes prophétiques et la prophétie en occident (XIIe–XVIe siècle), ed. Vauchez, A. (Rome, 1990), 135–65, at 140–48 (the article appeared originally in Mélanges de l'école française de Rome: Moyen Âge 102 [1990]: 425–55, at 430–38). Simon du Bosc's copy of “Ve mundo” is Rouen, Bibliothèque municipale, MS 1355, fol. 97v.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ For a detailed account of the murder of Andrew of Hungary, strangled by a cord as he was pushed by hired assassins from a balcony, see Léonard, Emile G., Les Angevins de Naples (Paris, 1954), 344–47. A shorter account is Mollat, Popes at Avignon, 178–79.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ The B manuscript of the commentary definitely knows the Hungarian invasion of Naples that followed after the murder of 1345. Specifically, a final paragraph in the B text of the commentary on the Naples section abruptly offers some prophetic lines attributed to “Joachim” (evidently pseudo-Joachim) which allude to vengeance being wreaked on an inculpated woman by “Hungarians.” This paragraph, however, which reads entirely as if it was originally a marginal comment, must be an interpolation. Its appearance in B fits with the circumstance that B was copied in Hungary: an earlier Hungarian reader who knew the outcome of the events must have placed a cross-reference to an apposite Pseudo-Joachite prophecy concerning Hungary in the margin, and the marginal comment must have been inserted later at the end of the Gentile's “Apulia” commentary as it appears in B.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Why “Ve mundo” ignored England after treating France is unclear. Perhaps the author did not wish to offend Edward I; perhaps he was alluding to an English monarch in his reference to a king who would discipline the Irish, the “shameless people.” Google Scholar

⁵⁸ On the exegetical commonplace of the time after Antichrist, see Lerner, Robert E., “Refreshment of the Saints: The Time after Antichrist as a Station for Progress in Medieval Thought,” Traditio 32 (1976): 97–144.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ Ibid., 110–13, 122. For Joachite versions of the final conversion of the Jews, see Lerner, Robert E., The Feast of Saint Abraham: Medieval Millenarians and the Jews (Philadelphia, 2001).Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Reeves, Marjorie, “The Originality and Influence of Joachim of Fiore,” Traditio 36 (1980): 269–316, at 288, 297–99.Google Scholar

⁶¹ See now Fleming, Martha, The Late Medieval Pope Prophecies: The Genus nequam Group (Tempe, Ariz., 1999).Google Scholar

⁶² Compare Gentile (II, 6, lines 129–31): “Tunc exibit vox de sanctuario dicens: Ite ad occidentem septicollis et querite in syndone beati Iohannis pauperem nudum amicum meum” with Genus nequam, unit 12, ed. Fleming, , p. 177: “Preco invisibilis ter clamabit maxime: Ite ad occidentem septicollis. Invenietis virum, habitatorem, amicum meum.” Google Scholar

⁶³ The pope is nudus in units 11 and 13 of Genus nequam and senex in unit 14.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ The best study of the Liber de Flore remains Grundmann, ”Liber de Flore” (n. 1). For the dating, see ibid., 109, 131: the firm terminus ante quem is the election of Clement V in June 1305; the terminus post quem the time when it became known that Arnald of Villanova (mentioned in the Liber) was favorable to the Spirituals, which Grundmann places in the summer of 1304.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ Matthias Kaup is preparing a critical edition of the Liber de Flore. Here we refer to the copy in Arras, Bibliothèque municipale, MS 138, fols. 85r–106v (the same Arras manuscript that contains Gentile's commentary on “Ve mundo”) at fol. 97r: “… angelus Domini residebit in solio suo sacro. Angelum dico, quia vere poterit angelus Domini appellari, licet homo fidelis. Hic pauper, modestus, et sapiens … angelus enim custos ipsum anunciabit. … Primo, quia videtur homo in etate decrepita constitutus. Secundo, quia pauper, exiguus, religiosus. Tercio et ultimo, quia ab angelo custoditus.” Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Ibid., fols. 97v–98r: “Aliqui vero ex ipsis Grecis in sacrosancto solio assumentur et in sacri solii complices eligentur, ut unio sit in omnibus robborata.” The similarity between this passage and Gentile's commentary was already noticed by Grundmann, , Liber de Flore, 141 n. 96.Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Proof that Genus nequam was based on the Byzantine Leo Oracles was offered in Herbert Grundmann's groundbreaking “Die Papstprophetien des Mittelalters,” originally published in 1928 and reprinted in Grundmann, , Ausgewählte Aufsätze, Teil II (n. 1), 1–57.Google Scholar

⁶⁸ See the edition in PG 107:1129–40, at 1138. Reeves, , “Some Popular Prophecies” (n. 1), assumed that Gentile was drawing on the Leo Oracles without considering the objections.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ For a discussion of this text, see Alexander, Paul, The Byzantine Apocalyptic Tradition (Berkeley, 1985), 130–36. Alexander was unaware of a medieval Latin translation of the Cento, made sometime before the third decade of the fourteenth century. A copy, identified by Martha Fleming, is Yale University, Beinecke Library, Marston MS 225, fols. 23r–28r; see Fleming, , Late Medieval Pope Prophecies, 15, 30, 70–72. The Latin version of the Cento is another witness to the frequency of Latin translations of Greek imperial prophecies in the West roughly around 1300.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ PG 107:1140–50, at 1143 (in the Latin translation of the PG: “nudum et lino pretioso vestitum”). Although the medieval Latin version of the Cento refers to the miraculous discovery of a hidden hero in the west of Constantinople (Yale MS, fol. 24v) it lacks the reference to his being dressed in linen.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Cf. Alexander, 132: “the author of the Cento … may be quoting from a source of the Oracles rather than from the Oracles themselves.” Regarding the possibility that Gentile's Latin prophecy (or its progenitor) was a Latin pastiche of Oracles and Cento, it seems most unlikely that a Latin author would have drawn simultaneously on two Greek texts.Google Scholar

⁷² . Recent scholarship has shown that the Genus nequam prophecies originated as prophecies meant to pertain to cardinals, apparently at a somewhat earlier date. See Lerner, Robert E., “Recent Work on the Origins of the ‘Genus nequam’ Prophecies,” Florensia 7 (1993): 141–57. But the earliest known evidence for their reconception as pope prophecies dates from the time of the interregnum: we refer to the Florentine MS discussed by Fleming, The Late Medieval Pope Prophecies, 56–62, which identifies popes through Benedict XI.Google Scholar

⁷³ See Lerner, , “Recent Work,” 627, n. 38; Grundmann, , “Papstprophetien,” 2, 15.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ On Ubertino's career in this period, Lerner, Robert E., “The Prophetic Manuscripts of the ‘Renaissance Magus’ Pierleone of Spoleto,” in Il profetismo gioachimita tra Quattrocento e Cinquecento: Atti del III Congresso Internazionale, ed. Potestà, G. L. (Genoa, 1991), 99–116, at 101–2.Google Scholar

⁷⁵ da Casale, Ubertino, Arbor vitae crucifixae Iesu (Venice, 1485; repr. Turin, 1961), V, 8, 467b.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ . Ibid., V, 10, 476b: “dicitur: post hec vidi alium angelum descendentem de celo, habentem postestatem magnam … et forte iste angelus erit idem summus pontifex de quo supra est dictum vel alius eius perfectionis successor.” Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Potestà, Gian Luca, Storia ed escatologia in Ubertino da Casale (Milan, 1980), 219–20, also referring to literature that places the dating of Angelo Clareno's translation of the Scala Paradisi between 1300 and 1305. Potestà, Angelo Clareno, 315–23, shows that Angelo was the author of translations of several other Greek ascetic works.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ Grundmann, , “Papstprophetien” (n. 67) hypothesized that Angelo Clareno, or someone associated with him who had returned from Greece, was the author of the Genus nequam pope prophecies. This hypothesis has now been disproved on the grounds that an early form of the Genus nequam prophecies arose in Italy in the 1280s. (See Lerner, , “Recent Work.”) But there is no reason why the hypothesis cannot be applied to the origins of other pope prophecies, such as those cited by Gentile of Foligno.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ For the conclusion that Angelo was not a Joachite, we follow Potestà, Angelo, 212. We are familiar with arguments to the contrary but do not find them persuasive.Google Scholar

¹ See Ott, Norbert H., Rechtspraxis und Heilsgeschichte. Zur Überlieferung, Ikonographie und Gebrauchssituation des deutschen ”Belial” (Munich, 1983).Google Scholar

² The Belial refers several times to Urban VI as reigning pope and even calls him “verus sponsus Romane ecclesie.” Grundmann, “Liber de Flore” (above, n. 1), 107–8, places the origins in Avignon without explaining his grounds and without considering the Urbanist commitment of the Belial Google Scholar

³ The manuscript was held earlier by the Viennese court library (after 1918 the National Library), where it had the shelf mark 545. Accordingly it is referred to this way in the older literature. Shortly after 1932 it was sent to Budapest as part of property adjustments among the successor states of the Austro-Hungarian empire.Google Scholar

⁴ Edited by Domanovszky, Alexander in Szentéry, Emericus, ed., Scriptores Rerum Hungaricorum Tempore Ducum Regumque Stirpis Arpadianae Gestarum (Budapest, 1937), 1:277–505. Our manuscript is dated here to the fourteenth century and is listed as one of the most important textual witnesses.Google Scholar

⁵ Edited as Relatio Fr. Ordorici in Anastasius von den Wyngaert, Sinica Franciscana, I. Itinera et Relationes Fratrum Minorum Saeculi XIII et XIV (Florence, 1929), 379–495. Our manuscript is here dated to the fourteenth century. Odoricus does not treat Hungary but does deal with Mongol-dominated China; this material possibly was of interest to Hungarian readers because of the earlier Mongol invasion of Hungary.Google Scholar

⁶ For the contents of the two manuscripts, see Tognetti, Giampaolo, “Le Fortune della Pretesa Profezia di San Cataldo,” Bullettino dell'Istituto Storico Italiano per il Medioevo e Archivio Muratoriano 80 (1968): 273–317, at 296–301.Google Scholar

⁷ Here we follow Tognetti, “Fortune,” 300–301. An alternative view is offered by Rusconi, Roberto, “Ex Quodam Antiquissimo Libello'. La tradizione manoscritta delle Profezie nell'Italia tardomedioevale,” in Verbeke, W. et al., The Use and Abuse of Eschatology in the Middle Ages (Louvain, 1988), 441–72, at 445–49 (the article is reprinted in Rusconi, Profezia e Profeti alla Fine del Medioevo [Rome, 1999]). Rusconi proposes that F₂ is an incomplete fair copy of F₁ and F₁ the original anthology, compiled by Luca from 1442 until the end of the century. But this is disproved, not only by the pattern of variants for the commentary — the same holds for the “Profetia Sancti Cataldi,” edited by Tognetti, , “Fortune,” 301 — but also by the consistency of the script in F₁, which is not in keeping with compilation over a period of more than fifty years.Google Scholar

⁸ Luca Bernardi writes that he had copied the prophecy “in anno Domini 1494, die 10 Maii, dum Carolus Francorum rex versaretur circa Romam cum multis milibus armatorum eundi causa expugnatum regnum Neapolitanum, ut aiebant.” He thus indicates that Charles VIII of France had stopped in Rome, according to rumor, to set forth to conquer the Kingdom of Naples. The given date poses a computistical problem. As a Florentine grammar teacher Luca must have used the local calendar, meaning the stilus Florentinus, which is a year behind our system in the period between 1 January and 24 March. Since Charles stayed in Rome from 31 December 1494 to 28 January on his march toward Naples, Luca could only have meant 10 January 1495 (= 10 January 1494 stilus Florentinus). The January date, moreover, fits into the sequence of dates given in Luca's rubrics for his various prophecy entries — F₁: 10/1/1494 (34r), 16/1/1494 (42r^b), 22/1/1494 (44v^b); F₂: 10/1/1494 (45r), 16/1/1494 (53v^b).Google Scholar

<I.> a) In nomine sancte et individue trinitatis. Amen. Infrascriptam A +a)+In+nomine+sancte+et+individue+trinitatis.+Amen.+Infrascriptam+A>Google Scholar

b) followed by etc λ, in centum annis] omitted A Google Scholar

c) Gentiles de Fulgineo λ Google Scholar

d) Villa Nova] Villanova δ Google Scholar

e) viri sancti] sancti viri λ Google Scholar

f) intitulabatur A Google Scholar

g) et δ Google Scholar

h) ostendit δ Google Scholar

i) omitted λ Google Scholar

j) followed by in λ Google Scholar

k) XX^o libro] libro 20 δ Google Scholar

l) illegible in A Google Scholar

m) annos λ Google Scholar

n) M.CCCC. circa LXXVI annum A, 1576 λ, corr, corr. from 1476 F ₁ , followed by marg. 1376 F ₂ . Google Scholar

o) per dictam λ Google Scholar

p) comunicatum A, fore comunicatam] comunicatam sibi λ Google Scholar

q) in quo tractatu inserit – quodam viro sancto] omitted B Google Scholar

r) omitted λ Google Scholar

s) omitted δ Google Scholar

t) presumptuosum videatur] presumptuosus videar δ Google Scholar

u) pro consolacione rudium apposui] apono (exponam λ) pro consolacione rudium δ Google Scholar

v) circa ipsam de subtiliori littera] omitted δ Google Scholar

w) quasdam declaraciones] cum quibusdam declaracionibus λ Google Scholar

x) aliquantulum δ Google Scholar

y) perspicuis λ Google Scholar

z) factis λ Google Scholar

a) followed by his F ₁ . Google Scholar

b) followed by alias δ Google Scholar

c) plura δ Google Scholar

d) predictum autem tractatum cum] omitted δ Google Scholar

e) ipsa prophetia in ipso contenta] <1.> istam prophetiam A, <2.> et istam prophetiam λ +istam+prophetiam+A,+<2.>+et+istam+prophetiam+λ>Google Scholar

f) scripsit dominus frater Gentiles λ Google Scholar

g) in λ, omitted A Google Scholar

h) sed nuper reinveni — nullam omnino memoriam habebam.] cum predicto tractatu. δ, followed by Ego vero Lucas Geminianensis ab ea copiavi in anno Domini 1494 die 10 Maii, dum Carolus Francorum rex versaretur circa Romam cum multis milibus armatorum eundi causa (causam F ₂ ) expugnatum regnum Neapolitanum, ut aiebant etc. λ Google Scholar

¹ Cf. Arnald of Villanova, De mysterio cymbalorum ecclesie (above p. 150, n. 3), pp. 102–3, lines 939–92: “Nam ego, qui sum vermis et non homo, in multis fidelibus istud vidi, et quod maius est, virum fere illiteratum, qui totus ad exaltationem fidei suspirabat, revelationem futurorum vidisse atque scripsisse sub Latina facundia miro stilo. Quam revelationem licet scripsisset, quia tamen intelligere non poterat per ipsum, cuidam devoto suo in Christo, litterature notabilis, ad expositionem communicavit et mutuo fuerunt per eam illuminati. Postmodum vero mihi communicata est sub talibus verbis: ‘Ve hoc mundo [follows the prophecy]’ Cum ad credendum predicta nemo cogatur, Deo et doctoribus relinquo determinandum, an sint credenda. Sed hoc mihi sufficit ex omnibus intelligere, quod, cum in centum annis dicantur esse ventura, consonant Augustino et Erithee ac supradicto intellectui Danielis.” Google Scholar

² For Gentile's use of extra-biblical prophecies see below, II, 2 and II, 6.Google Scholar

a) sequitur textus – Ve mundo] omitted δ Google Scholar

<1> a) followed by et a pulchritudine pacis et vita virtuosa δ, followed by scilicet A +a)+followed+by+et+a+pulchritudine+pacis+et+vita+virtuosa+δ,+followed+by+scilicet+A>Google Scholar

b) elongatum δ Google Scholar

c) dilataverunt λ Google Scholar

d) omitted λ Google Scholar

e) solutio λ Google Scholar

f) interlinear in B Google Scholar

g) habitant λ Google Scholar

h) littore in regno] provincia δ Google Scholar

i) in Tripoli] Tripolis δ Google Scholar

j) Ancon λ Google Scholar

k) followed by mala et δ Google Scholar

l) effecti δ Google Scholar

m) a Sarracenis eiecti sunt]<1.> eiecti sunt a Sarracenis A, <2.> eiecti a Sarracenis λ +eiecti+sunt+a+Sarracenis+A,+<2.>+eiecti+a+Sarracenis+λ>Google Scholar

n) ipse predicte] eorum δ Google Scholar

o) sunt et erunt] omitted δ Google Scholar

p) idest A, omitted λ Google Scholar

q) veniat de Syon – predictas civitates] post reformationem ecclesie imperans (imperians A) reparabit. δ Google Scholar

<2> a) directe λ +a)+directe+λ>Google Scholar

b) parabit A Google Scholar

c) omitted δ Google Scholar

d) a multo tempore] omitted δ Google Scholar

³ Gentile refers to the fall of Tripoli 1289 and the fall of Acre 1291.Google Scholar

⁴ See below, II, 6, where it is stated that a last Emperor and a last Pope will enter Jerusalem before the coming of Antichrist and be joyfully welcomed by the Saracens.Google Scholar

e) q(ua)n(do) δ Google Scholar

f) et sapientia] omitted λ Google Scholar

g) quia A Google Scholar

h) ex δ Google Scholar

i) sicut habetur in alia prophecia] omitted δ Google Scholar

j) followed by sanctus δ Google Scholar

k) prope δ Google Scholar

l) occidentis δ Google Scholar

<3> a) dicit, quod] omitted λ +a)+dicit,+quod]+omitted+λ>Google Scholar

b) continuo F ₂ . Google Scholar

c) sponsa, idest] omitted δ Google Scholar

d) ecclesia, reformetur] reformetur ecclesia δ Google Scholar

e) omitted δ Google Scholar

f) reformatur A Google Scholar

g) nisi consumptis — thesauris ipsius] quousque ipsius thesauri (ipsius thesauri] thesauri eius λ) sint consumpti. δ Google Scholar

h) followed by continue δ Google Scholar

i) tantum A Google Scholar

j) adiuvatur δ Google Scholar

k) omitted δ Google Scholar

l) omitted δ Google Scholar

m) ungule F ₂ , omitted F ₁ . Google Scholar

<4> a) propiis AF ₁ .+a)+propiis+AF+1+.>Google Scholar

b) qui λ Google Scholar

c) followed by mollis A Google Scholar

d) omitted λ Google Scholar

ε) consolabitur λ Google Scholar

f) followed by marg. with asterisk idest fiet papa F ₁ . Google Scholar

g) denegatur λ Google Scholar

h) veritatis λ Google Scholar

i) followed by veritas δ Google Scholar

j) denegatur — Egypti] as interlinear gloss above De Roma — fractura pontis in λ Google Scholar

⁵ See the prophecy section in the Liber de Flore (as p. 174, n. 65), fol. 97v–98r: “Ex Grecis, ut extimo, tempore pastoris angelici aliqui ex ipsis in complices (complicis A) sacri solii assumentur, ut unio sit in omnibus roborata.” Google Scholar

⁶ After the reference to the last Emperor in II, 1, the last Pope here makes his appearance who will work together with the Emperor in II, 6.Google Scholar

⁷ Gentile, , glossing bilinguis with Sciarra and ydolum with papa fictus, refers to the election of the antipope Nicholas V in 1328, substantially engineered by Sciarra Colonna. See above, p. 167.Google Scholar

k) omitted A Google Scholar

l) dicit, quod ipsius fastigia — se mutuo furiose. Et] omitted δ Google Scholar

m) n(un)c λ Google Scholar

n) ista, scilicet] omitted δ Google Scholar

o) followed by marg. Non recte exposuit, quia erunt post 1494 F ₂ . Google Scholar

p) credo fuisse] <1.> suspicor tunc fuisse A, <2.> tunc fuisse suspicor λ +suspicor+tunc+fuisse+A,+<2.>+tunc+fuisse+suspicor+λ>Google Scholar

q) omitted δ Google Scholar

r) homines Asye – ipsorum pervenerunt] omitted δ Google Scholar

s) retinuerunt A F ₂ , detinuerunt F ₁ . Google Scholar

t) followed by ad δ Google Scholar

u) est δ Google Scholar

v) societas δ Google Scholar

w) misit illuc] illuc misit δ Google Scholar

x) omitted δ Google Scholar

y) phus A Google Scholar

z) sue, que fuit filia] <1.> filie A F ₂ , <2.> filie regis F ₁ <5> a) nidu(m) A +filie+A+F+2+,+<2.>+filie+regis+F+1+<5>+a)+nidu(m)+A>Google Scholar

b) propia AF1 Google Scholar

c) lacerabitur λ Google Scholar

d) polices A, polites F ₂ . Google Scholar

e) ac δ Google Scholar

f) exproba A, expertam λ Google Scholar

g) medelam cognoscere] cognoscere medelam λ Google Scholar

h) nidus onagrorum] omitted δ Google Scholar

i) followed by sanctus δ Google Scholar

j) in solitudine] omitted B Google Scholar

k) contemnet λ Google Scholar

l) audiet δ Google Scholar

m) igitur significant viros religiosos] sunt veri (viri λ) religiosi δ Google Scholar

n) omitted λ Google Scholar

o) fuerunt B, principaliter fecerunt] fecerunt principaliter A Google Scholar

p) nidum suum] omitted B Google Scholar

q) videlicet A, idest λ, followed by beatus Augustinus λ Google Scholar

r) followed by beatus A, followed by et beatus λ Google Scholar

s) followed by beatus δ Google Scholar

t) similiter sancti — Augustini] omitted δ Google Scholar

u) quorum eciam in Ytalia sunt] et in Italia sunt eorum δ Google Scholar

v) ipsorum merita] ipsos δ Google Scholar

⁸ Pons mollis was a name for the Milvian Bridge outside of Rome. See above, p. 166.Google Scholar

⁹ Most likely a reference to the conquest of Nicea by the Turks in 1331. See above, p. 166.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Gentile here refers to the unsuccessful military campaign of Walter of Brienne, waged on behalf of his father-in-law Philip of Taranto in Epirus in 1331/32. Philip, son of King Charles II of Naples, wanted to claim the rights of his wife Tamar, daughter of the Despot of Epirus. See above, p. 166–67.Google Scholar

¹¹ Cf. Job 39:5–7.Google Scholar

<6> viscerum > preliis intrinsecis B fractis cervicibus > (1) debellatis principibus B (2) idest devictis principibus A sacerdotibus giganteis > (1) et cardinalibus B (2) idest prelatis maximis A (3) idest prelatis idest magnis λ multitudo beluarum excitabit> idest principum secularium contra ecclesiam A; beluarum> principum secularium B; excitabit> contra (omitted F ₁ ) ecclesiam λ procellam> tri-bulacionum B navigantes> (1) viros ecclesiasticos B (2) idest (omitted λ) in navi ecclesie δ principibus > (1) maioribus prelatis ecclesie B (2) scilicet ecclesie A tranquillitas popularis > (1) minorum clericorum B (2) idest subdictorum clericorum A (3) idest subditos populos λ +viscerum+>+preliis+intrinsecis+B+fractis+cervicibus+>+(1)+debellatis+principibus+B+(2)+idest+devictis+principibus+A+sacerdotibus+giganteis+>+(1)+et+cardinalibus+B+(2)+idest+prelatis+maximis+A+(3)+idest+prelatis+idest+magnis+λ+multitudo+beluarum+excitabit>+idest+principum+secularium+contra+ecclesiam+A;+beluarum>+principum+secularium+B;+excitabit>+contra+(omitted+F+1+)+ecclesiam+λ+procellam>+tri-bulacionum+B+navigantes>+(1)+viros+ecclesiasticos+B+(2)+idest+(omitted+λ)+in+navi+ecclesie+δ+principibus+>+(1)+maioribus+prelatis+ecclesie+B+(2)+scilicet+ecclesie+A+tranquillitas+popularis+>+(1)+minorum+clericorum+B+(2)+idest+subdictorum+clericorum+A+(3)+idest+subditos+populos+λ>Google Scholar

w) propter Ytalicorum peccata — lupis, scilicet] iste nidus propter peccata mordebitur (mordentur A) a δ Google Scholar

x) omitted δ Google Scholar

y) propter δ Google Scholar

z) omitted δ Google Scholar

a) depressionis δ Google Scholar

b) omitted A Google Scholar

c) refrigeracionem sue angustie et depressionis] refrigeracionis δ Google Scholar

d) contricio et oppressio omnium tyrannorum facta divino iudicio] quia conteret omnes tirannos, qui ipsam momorderunt et oppresserunt. δ Google Scholar

<6> In δ the sixth chapter is inserted between the eleventh and twelfth chapters +In+δ+the+sixth+chapter+is+inserted+between+the+eleventh+and+twelfth+chapters>Google Scholar

a) viscerum dolore] dolore viscerum A Google Scholar

b) gateis λ Google Scholar

c) omitted λ Google Scholar

d) ut subiciat] subiciens δ Google Scholar

e) afligitur A Google Scholar

f) et torquebitur] omitted δ Google Scholar

g) infra λ Google Scholar

h) cut out in A Google Scholar

i) cervicibus fractis] debellatis δ Google Scholar

j) de calice furoris Domini] etc. B Google Scholar

k) followed by maximis prelatis ecclesie, qui (cut out in A, quia F₁) in ipsa erunt. Et isti sunt δ Google Scholar

l) sacerdotibus giganteis, idest papa — ita ipsi excedunt] sacerdotes gigantei, quia sicut gigantes sunt maximi inter omnes homines, ita papa et cardinales sunt maximi inter δ Google Scholar

m) ista autem] et ista δ Google Scholar

n) omitted δ Google Scholar

o) idest omnes personas ecclesiasticas sive totum clerum] omitted δ p) followed by reges A, multitudo) beluarum — ista multitudo beluarum sunt isti] multitudo principum istam persecutionem ecclesie facient maioribus et minoribus. Et ideo (et ideo] idest A) dicit multitudo belluarum, idest principum secularium, excitabit procellam contra navem ecclesie. Hii (hi λ) sunt δ Google Scholar

q) followed by reges λ Google Scholar

r) dicit δ Google Scholar

s) x^o λ Google Scholar

t) qui δ Google Scholar

u) eciam B Google Scholar

v) tradent bestie] bestie tradent δ Google Scholar

w) istud imperium] ista δ Google Scholar

x) supra δ Google Scholar

y) meretrix sedet] sedet meretrix λ Google Scholar

z) Apoc(alipsis) XVIII. capitulo, ubi dicitur: Et dixit michi] omitted δ Google Scholar

a) aquas, quas — sunt et reges] et iste sunt aque, supra quas ista (ipsa λ) meretrix sedet, scilicet populi, tribus δ Google Scholar

b) omitted F ₁ . Google Scholar

c) omitted δ Google Scholar

d) followed by ut ibidem dicitur δ Google Scholar

e) edent A, hii odient] hi odibunt λ Google Scholar

f) carnem λ Google Scholar

g) et ipsi igni cremabunt] omitted δ Google Scholar

h) Dominus λ Google Scholar

i) cordibus λ Google Scholar

j) eorum δ Google Scholar

k) ut faciant] omitted λ Google Scholar

l) det λ Google Scholar

m) comsumpnentur verba] consumetur verbum δ Google Scholar

n) followed by omnes δ Google Scholar

o) persecutio δ Google Scholar

p) perniciosa non] non pernitiosa λ Google Scholar

q) est δ Google Scholar

r) erit δ Google Scholar

s) destruatur δ Google Scholar

t) ipsius A Google Scholar

u) followed by et A Google Scholar

v) sanctitas primitiva] primeva sanctitas δ Google Scholar

w) post ipsam tribulacionem] omitted δ Google Scholar

x) ibidem δ Google Scholar

y) alterum δ Google Scholar

z) idest δ, omitted A Google Scholar

a) ecclesie pontificem et pastorem] pontificem ecclesie, pastorem scilicet δ Google Scholar

b) followed by sanctitatis δ Google Scholar

c) forti voce δ Google Scholar

d) omitted δ Google Scholar

e) perversi status] status moderni (moderne λ) δ Google Scholar

f) propter quod] qui A, que λ Google Scholar

g) propter quod] cum δ Google Scholar

h) de renovacione ipsius, propter quod dicetur] renovationis illius, cum dicitur λ Google Scholar

¹² Apoc. 17:13.Google Scholar

¹³ Apoc. 17:15–16.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Apoc. 17:17–18.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Apoc. 18:1–2.Google Scholar

i) quantum δ Google Scholar

j) determinare ignoro] nescio δ Google Scholar

k) pape Bonifacii] Bonifatii pape δ Google Scholar

l) quo A Google Scholar

m) ecclesia Romana debebat] Romana ecclesia de curia debebat δ Google Scholar

n) followed by per A Google Scholar

o) ibi debet ipsam persecucionem recipere] ibidem bibet de calice furoris δ Google Scholar

p) quadam δ Google Scholar

q) anni forte triginta] fere 30 anni δ Google Scholar

r) tribulationis δ Google Scholar

s) radii δ Google Scholar

t) Romana A Google Scholar

u) aliquo tempore] omitted δ Google Scholar

v) papam volentes unum eligere] in papam unum δ Google Scholar

w) omitted δ Google Scholar

x) eligite F ₁ . Google Scholar

y) pristinum A Google Scholar

z) omitted λ Google Scholar

a) perseq(ue)tur F ₁ . Google Scholar

b) omitted δ Google Scholar

c) omitted λ Google Scholar

d) recipietur A Google Scholar

e) pape tercii] tercii pape δ Google Scholar

¹⁶ This prophecy is otherwise unknown. For analysis see above, p. 169.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Regarding this prophecy and its relationship to the non-biblical prophecy in II, 2, see above, p. 173–76.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Cf. Vaticinia de summis pontificibus, Genus nequam (p. 173, n. 61), 177: “Preco invisibilis ter clamabit maxime: Ite ad occidentem septicollis. Invenietis virum habitatorem, amicum meum.” Cf. also Mark 14:51–52: “Adulescens quidam sequebatur illum amictus sindone super nudo et tenuerunt eum. At ille reiecta sindone nudus profugit ab eis.” Also the marginal commentary of the Glossa Ordinaria (Biblia Latina cum Glossa Ordinaria. Facsimile Reprint of the Editio Princeps. Adolph Rusch of Straßburg 1480/81 [Turnhout, 1992] 4:130a): ‘“Adolescens autem.’ Quis iste fuerit, evangelista non dicit. Quia vero plus caeteris Dominum amaverit, res ipsa indicavit: Aliis fugientibus ipse, donec ab hoste comprehenderetur, charitatis vinculo astrictus Dominum sequi non omisit. … Possumus tamen hunc Iohannem fuisse intelligere pre ceteris dilectum a magistro. …” Google Scholar

¹⁹ Cf. the prophecy section in the Liber de Flore (p. 174, n. 65), fol. 97r: “Ego vero extimo, quod tribulatione futura totaliter terminata et non ante angelus Domini residebit in solio suo sacro. Angelum dico, quia vere poterit angelus Domini appellari, licet homo fidelis. Hic pauper modestus et sapiens, quia etiam revelacione angelica consignabitur post multam discordiam inter pastores discordie et afflictionem universalem iamdictam. “Hunc virum Dei absconditum ab angelo custoditum, angelus enim custos ipsum anunciabit, licet Merlinus asserat virum de petra mortuum. Mortuus est spiritualiter, quia a vita seculi separatus est per effectum sive intencionem, que mors tunc est abscondita, cum intencio calamitatibus corporis veris aut fictis aliis omnibus occultatur dicens: Erit mors eius abscondita. Ego super hoc non diffinio bene, nec opinioni ipsius adhereo. Et licet non affirmative dicam, videtur michi, quod idem vir de petra erit angelus prelibatus. Et tria me movent ad opinionem predictam. Primo, quia videtur homo in etate decrepita constitutus. Secundo, quia pauper, exiguus, religiosus. Tercio et ultimo, quia ab angelo custoditus.” Google Scholar

<7> brachia> dominatores B constringent> rigide regnant B conplicabuntur> perdent dominium B replecione> diviciarum B sponse> idest sue regine B menstrua deglutivit> abhominabiles lascivias cum tedio sustinuit B fune proprio > a propriis de domo B merentibus genitis> plangentibus filiis B +brachia>+dominatores+B+constringent>+rigide+regnant+B+conplicabuntur>+perdent+dominium+B+replecione>+diviciarum+B+sponse>+idest+sue+regine+B+menstrua+deglutivit>+abhominabiles+lascivias+cum+tedio+sustinuit+B+fune+proprio+>+a+propriis+de+domo+B+merentibus+genitis>+plangentibus+filiis+B>Google Scholar

<7> a) constringet λ +a)+constringet+λ>Google Scholar

b) inmoderata δ Google Scholar

c) propio AF ₁ . Google Scholar

d) transibit inpune] <1.> i(n)pune transibit AF ₁ , <2.> i(n)pune pertransibit F ₂ . +i(n)pune+transibit+AF+1+,+<2.>+i(n)pune+pertransibit+F+2+.>Google Scholar

e) dominantes in ipso regno] omitted δ Google Scholar

f) imperant subditis. Sed] regent subditos et δ Google Scholar

g) fuerit dilatatum] dilatatum fuerit λ Google Scholar

h) eorum A Google Scholar

i) followed by m(u)ltu(m) A, followed by militum λ Google Scholar

j) repleti diviciis] diviciis replecti A Google Scholar

k) ipsorum peccata] peccatum ipsorum δ Google Scholar

l) amittent λ Google Scholar

m) de quibus peccatis — ipsi regnarent.] Quod peccatum declarat, strangulatio (scilicet strangulationis λ) regis, qui corruit de solio strangulatus fune propio, idest a propiis parentibus de domo sua, qui propter ambitionem occiderunt eum, ut scilicet (ut scilicet] scilicet ut λ) ipsi regnarent. Qui (quod λ) rex deglutivit (declutivit λ) menstrua, idest abominabiles lascivias sponse sue (sponse sue] sue sponse λ) cum multo mentis tedio substinuit. δ Google Scholar

n) followed by ipsorum δ Google Scholar

o) non solum ipsi, sed eciam] omitted δ Google Scholar

p) filii δ Google Scholar

q) per λ Google Scholar

r) followed by Ioachinus, ubi tractat de regno Gallie, dicit sic: “Corruet auxiliatrix, cadet, cui prestatur auxilium. Lingua Phari devorabit eas, et Hungari habitabunt in ea, quia non unxerunt dominum suum regem, sed morte pessima interfecerunt eum et ideo ad terram prostrati erunt nec invenient iuvamen in die illa pro eo, quod Domini sui est interfectrix.” B Google Scholar

²⁰ Here a paragraph follows only in B that cites a passage from an otherwise unknown Pseudo-Joachite prophecy. It probably was first a marginal gloss, which a scribe copied after the Hungarian invasion of 1347/48, and then became part of the text. In English it reads: “Joachim, where he treats the kingdom of France, says: ‘The help-mistress will sink down, she will fall to whom aid is granted. The land tongue of the sea narrows will devour her, and the Hungarians will dwell in her because they have not anointed their lord and king, but rather killed him with a quite terrible death. And therefore they will be cast down on the earth, and they will find no aid on that day, and that will happen because she is the murderess of her lord.’” Google Scholar

<8> a) ministri λ +a)+ministri+λ>Google Scholar

b) followed by scilicet veritatis λ Google Scholar

c) omitted δ Google Scholar

d) philosophye δ Google Scholar

e) possunt dici] omitted δ Google Scholar

f) omitted δ Google Scholar

g) summo δ Google Scholar

h) omitted δ Google Scholar

i) p(rop)h(ec)ia A Google Scholar

j) in ipsa philosophia student] student in phylosophia F ₁ . Google Scholar

k) preceptum λ Google Scholar

l) fundamentorum A Google Scholar

m) tabescet (probably mutilated) A Google Scholar

n) evacuabitur A Google Scholar

o) idest talium studencium, garritus] garritus, idest talium studentium, abhorribilis δ Google Scholar

p) studet obtegere veritatem Sacre Scripture] omitted δ Google Scholar

q) irridebit δ Google Scholar

r) ministros λ Google Scholar

s) omitted δ Google Scholar

t) omitted λ, sapientibus scilicet] idest sapientibus A Google Scholar

u) idest A Google Scholar

v) scilicet discipuli Aristotilis] as interlinear gloss above “tales”: idest discipuli Aristotelis λ Google Scholar

w) omitted F ₁ . Google Scholar

x) followed by abominabilis idest A Google Scholar

y) magis quam] et non λ, non A Google Scholar

z) a A Google Scholar

a) prim (mutilated) A Google Scholar

b) suo A Google Scholar

c) omitted δ Google Scholar

d) inbui(mutilated) A, induitur λ Google Scholar

e) oppositionibus δ Google Scholar

f) est r(ati)onibus A Google Scholar

g) ph(mutilated) A Google Scholar

h) ei Veritas fidei] sibi fidei veritas δ Google Scholar

i) cut out in A Google Scholar

j) omitted F ₁ . Google Scholar

k) repleatur anima — os meum] etc. B Google Scholar

²¹ Cf. Ps. 62:6.Google Scholar

<9> populo inpudico > idest Ybernie δ (in the text λ) +populo+inpudico+>+idest+Ybernie+δ+(in+the+text+λ)>Google Scholar

<10> nutrix Machometice pravitatis> (1) Sarracenorum B (2) idest Sarracenorum pravitas δ furia laniabitur> idest Hispanorum et Saracenorum F ₂ nam – consurgent> Sarraceni contra Christianos et Christiani contra Sarracenos B pullus iumentalis > quidam rex Sarracenorum B tria septena> XXI^m annum B vorans> Yspaniam γ (in the text δ) vespertilio > idest rex δ (in the text λ), follows erroneously Yspanie A; scinifex> rex B devoret> Sarracenos γ (in the text δ) subiciensque Africam> idest imperii Romanorum et Sarracenorum A; caput bestie> idest imperium Romanorum λ Nili habitatores > (1) Egipcios B (2) idest Egipcios vel Saracenos (Saracenorum F ₂ ) λ +nutrix+Machometice+pravitatis>+(1)+Sarracenorum+B+(2)+idest+Sarracenorum+pravitas+δ+furia+laniabitur>+idest+Hispanorum+et+Saracenorum+F+2+nam+–+consurgent>+Sarraceni+contra+Christianos+et+Christiani+contra+Sarracenos+B+pullus+iumentalis+>+quidam+rex+Sarracenorum+B+tria+septena>+XXIm+annum+B+vorans>+Yspaniam+γ+(in+the+text+δ)+vespertilio+>+idest+rex+δ+(in+the+text+λ),+follows+erroneously+Yspanie+A;+scinifex>+rex+B+devoret>+Sarracenos+γ+(in+the+text+δ)+subiciensque+Africam>+idest+imperii+Romanorum+et+Sarracenorum+A;+caput+bestie>+idest+imperium+Romanorum+λ+Nili+habitatores+>+(1)+Egipcios+B+(2)+idest+Egipcios+vel+Saracenos+(Saracenorum+F+2+)+λ>Google Scholar

<11> filius perdicionis > idest Antichristus δ (in the text λ) draco> idest diabolus δ (in the text λ) +filius+perdicionis+>+idest+Antichristus+δ+(in+the+text+λ)+draco>+idest+diabolus+δ+(in+the+text+λ)>Google Scholar

<9> a) cavernis F ₁ .+a)+cavernis+F+1+.>Google Scholar

b) propii A, propiis λ Google Scholar

c) miris λ Google Scholar

d) omitted A Google Scholar

e) ferocitas A, omitted λ, followed by illius δ Google Scholar

f) followed by idest Hibernie λ Google Scholar

<10> a) nutritur B +a)+nutritur+B>Google Scholar

b) Macomenice A, Maumette λ Google Scholar

c) omitted δ Google Scholar

d) septema A Google Scholar

e) followed by Hispaniam δ Google Scholar

f) followed by idest rex λ Google Scholar

g) followed by idest rex λ Google Scholar

h) omitted A, scinifex Yspanie] Hyspanie scinifex λ Google Scholar

i) followed by Sarracenos δ Google Scholar

j) subiciens λ Google Scholar

k) illi λ Google Scholar

<11> a) postquam λ +a)+postquam+λ>Google Scholar

b) followed by idest Antichristus λ Google Scholar

c) scribandum A, clibandum B Google Scholar

d) si paret F ₂ . Google Scholar

e) followed by idest diabolus λ Google Scholar

f) manent F ₂ . Google Scholar

g) followed by sequetur F ₁ . Google Scholar

h) postquam λ Google Scholar

i) omitted λ Google Scholar

j) quod incepit] qui incipit δ Google Scholar

k) a destruccione] ad destructionem λ Google Scholar

l) followed by: <1.> et Accon A, <2.> et Ancon λ +et+Accon+A,+<2.>+et+Ancon+λ>Google Scholar

m) fuerunt δ Google Scholar

n) scribandum A, clibandum B Google Scholar

o) idest ad faciendum — et versuciis ostendens] suis fallaciis et versutiis faciendo dubitare fideles de Christo et ostendendo δ Google Scholar

²² 2 Thess. 2:3.Google Scholar

²³ That is, 1289.Google Scholar

p) followed by idest Christum δ Google Scholar

q) credere nollent] non credent δ Google Scholar

r) illis λ Google Scholar

s) crederent A Google Scholar

t) et separet] separabit δ Google Scholar

u) scilicet A Google Scholar

v) sibi credentibus] idest infidelibus δ Google Scholar

w) scilicet tempore dominii Antichristi] omitted δ Google Scholar

x) idest dyabolus et Sathanas] omitted δ Google Scholar

y) et impugnandum, quia modico — manebit in eternum] habitatores (habitantes λ) in terra, sicut dicit Apocalipsis: Ve habitantibus in terra (habitantibus in terra] omitted λ), quia descendet ad vos diabolus (draco λ) habens iram magnam sciens, quia (quod λ) modicum tempus habet, δ Google Scholar

z) followed by et A Google Scholar

a) que A, ipsum λ Google Scholar

b) Apocalipsis A Google Scholar

c) neque δ Google Scholar

d) misterio A, omitted B Google Scholar

e) omitted A Google Scholar

f) sua F ₁ . Google Scholar

<III.> a) quia λ +a)+quia+λ>Google Scholar

b) omitted δ Google Scholar

c) omitted λ Google Scholar

d) omitted λ non erit ante tocius mundi generalem] erit non ante generalem totius mundi A Google Scholar

e) ipse Dominus] Christus δ Google Scholar

f) Mattheo XXIV] omitted δ Google Scholar

g) plangent δ Google Scholar

h) cum δ Google Scholar

i) followed by ipsius δ Google Scholar

j) ab Antichristo et suis ministris fuisse] <1.> se fuisse ab Antichristo et eius ministris A, <2.> se venisse ab Antichristo et (at the beginning of the next page followed by et F ₂ ) ipsius ministris λ +se+fuisse+ab+Antichristo+et+eius+ministris+A,+<2.>+se+venisse+ab+Antichristo+et+(at+the+beginning+of+the+next+page+followed+by+et+F+2+)+ipsius+ministris+λ>Google Scholar

k) omitted δ Google Scholar

l) non infra] infra non δ, followed by post A Google Scholar

²⁴ See the quotation from the Apocalypse in δ that probably influenced this formulation. Apoc. 12:12: “Ve terra et mari, quia descendit diabolus ad vos habens iram magnam sciens, quod modicum tempus habet.” Google Scholar

²⁵ 2 Thess. 2:8.Google Scholar

²⁶ Matt. 24:30.Google Scholar

m) ut ipse dixit ibidem, cum auctoritate et virtute multa] omitted δ Google Scholar

n) omitted δ Google Scholar

o) ex δ Google Scholar

p) omitted λ Google Scholar

q) et A Google Scholar

r) subdictos A Google Scholar

s) eorum δ Google Scholar

t) omitted δ Google Scholar

u) unam fidem et caritatem] una fide et caritate λ Google Scholar

v) quam subditi, quam prelati] prelati et subditi (subdicti A) δ Google Scholar

w) videris λ Google Scholar

x) omitted δ Google Scholar

y) followed by: <1.> sicut Christus dicit in evangelio A, <2.> sicut dicit Christus in evangelio λ +sicut+Christus+dicit+in+evangelio+A,+<2.>+sicut+dicit+Christus+in+evangelio+λ>Google Scholar

z) quoniam δ Google Scholar

a) proxima A Google Scholar

b) eciam in ianuis, scilicet] <1.> omitted A, <2.> finis et F ₁ , <3.> finis, idest F ₂ . +omitted+A,+<2.>+finis+et+F+1+,+<3.>+finis,+idest+F+2+.>Google Scholar

c) apostoli a Christo petiverant signum] <1.> apostoli petiverunt signum a Christo A, <2.> signum apostoli petieritis (petieri [rest illegible] F ₂ ) a Christo λ +apostoli+petiverunt+signum+a+Christo+A,+<2.>+signum+apostoli+petieritis+(petieri+[rest+illegible]+F+2+)+a+Christo+λ>Google Scholar

d) dicentes: Dic nobis — solus habet scienciam] omitted δ Google Scholar

e) follows i(n) B Google Scholar

f) qui vivit et regnat] cui sit honor et gloria δ Google Scholar

²⁷ . Cf. Matt. 24:30: “Et videbunt Filium hominis venientem in nubibus caeli cum virtute multa et maiestate, et mittet angelos suos cum tuba et voce magna.” Google Scholar

²⁸ Cf. Matt. 24:31.Google Scholar

²⁹ Matt. 24:33; Mark 13:29.Google Scholar

³⁰ Matt. 24:3.Google Scholar

³¹ Cf. Matt. 24:36; Mark 13:32.Google Scholar