¹ Cod. 160, fol. 250^v–263^v, in a good hand; I am most indebted to the archivist for having supplied the information which led to the discovery of this work.Google Scholar

² Cf. DDC 6 (Paris 1957) 1195–1215, by Lefebvre, C.; Nörr, K., Kirche und Konzil bei Nicholas de Tudeschis (Forschungen zur kirchlichen Rechtsgeschichte und zum Kirchenrecht 4; Köln-Graz 1964); Lefebvre, C., ‘L'enseignement de Nicholas de Tudeschis et l'autorité pontificale,’ Ephemerides iuris canonici 14 (1958) 312ff.; also Schweizer, J., Nicolaus de'Tudeschi …: Seine Tätigkeit am Basler Konzil (Strasbourg 1924).Google Scholar

³ Sandeus, Felinus, Commentaria in V lib. Decretalium (Venice 1570), I 365 n. 44, on X 1.3.2: ‘firmat etiam Abb. in proemio ad commentum quod incipit Basilicae (sic) super Decreto’: from the observation of S. Kuttner noted by Lefebvre, art. cit. 313 n. 6; Gesner, C., Bibliotheca universalis (Froschoveri 1545), fol. 532^v, followed by Mongitore, A., Bibliotheca Sicula II (Palermo 1714) 102: ‘Commentum inchoatum in Decretum, ex Gesnero cit., sed numquam se vidisse fatetur Bellarminus’. The work is mentioned by Lefebvre loc. cit. and DDC 6.1203.Google Scholar

⁴ British Museum, IC 34425 (Pisa 1485?): it is also included in editions of Felinus Sandeus, Super titulo de rescriptis et nonnullis aliis : Hain, L., Repertorium bibliographicum nos. 14301, 14303, 14304, 14306; also in Sandeus, , Commentaria in V lib. Decretalium (Venice 1570) III 1159–84. On Sandeus, cf. Hilling, N., ‘Felinus Sandeus, Auditor der Rota,’ AKKR 84 (1904) 94ff.; his Commentary was also printed at Basel, 1567.Google Scholar

⁵ Super Decreto, Lucca MS 160 fol. 250^v; the date previously given was 1436–7: DDC 6.1202.Google Scholar

⁶ Loc.cit. ; cf. de Turrecremata, Joannes, Commentarium super toto Decreto (Venice 1578) I 1, for the same sentiment, that ‘nemo nascitur sibi soli,’ as a reason for undertaking this commentary.Google Scholar

⁷ Op.cit. fol. 253^va, on D.1 c.1.Google Scholar

⁸ Op.cit. fol. 257^va, on D.1 c.6.Google Scholar

⁹ Ibid. fol. 257^va-b; cf. Aquinas, St. Thomas, Summa Theologiae 1^a 2^ae q. 94 a. 2, concl.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Cf. (Guido de Baysio), Archidiaconus, Rosarium (Venice 1495) on D.1 c.6.Google Scholar

¹¹ Ibid. fol. 257^r–261^r, on D.1 c.6: ‘An lex naturalis contineat unum preceptum an plura’ (fol. 257^vb–258^vb); ‘(an) sit nobis necessaria aliqua lex humana’ (fol. 258^vb–259^ra); ‘(an) fuerit necessaria aliqua lex divina’ (fol. 259^ra-va); ‘an lex divina sit una tantum vel plures’ (fol. 259^va-b); ‘an omnes actus virtuosi sint de lege nature’ (fol. 259^vb–260^ra); ‘utrum lex nature sit una apud omnes’ (fol. 260^ra-b); ‘an lex nature possit mutari’ (fol. 260^rb-va); ‘utrum lex nature possit a corde hominum aboleri’ (fol. 260^va-b); ‘an ipsa lex (eterna) sit omnibus nota’ (fol. 260^vb–261^ra). Cf. Summa Theologiae 1^a2^ae q. 91 a.3–4; q. 93 a.2; q. 94 a.2–6.Google Scholar

¹² Ibid. fol. 259^ra .Google Scholar

¹³ Ibid. fol. 259^va .Google Scholar

¹⁴ Ibid. fol. 261^ra .Google Scholar

¹⁵ Ibid. fol. 257^v .Google Scholar

¹⁶ Gierke, O., Political Theories of the Middle Ages, trans. Maitland, F. (Boston 1958) 98.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Op.cit. fol. 251^rb .Google Scholar

¹⁸ Ibid. fol. 261^rb, on D.1 c.8; cf. fol. 257^va, and also 263^v, on D.1 c.12, where there is an inconclusive discussion on the claims of the Roman empire. On Bartolus, cf. Ullmann, W., Principles of Government and Politics in the Middle Ages (Cambridge 1961) 283–5; and id. ‘De Bartoli sententia: Concilium representat mentem populi,’ in Bartolus de Sassoferrato: Studia et documenta (Perugia 1961) II 703ff.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Op.cit. fol. 261^rb .Google Scholar

²⁰ Ibid. fol. 261^rb-va, on D.1 c.8. Cf. Summa Theol. 1^a 2^ae q. 90 a.3, concl. ad 2^m, ad 3^m .Google Scholar

²¹ Ibid. fol. 261^va; cf. ibid. fol. 261^vb . cf. Aristotle, , Politics 1.1.Google Scholar

²² Ibid. fol. 254^ra, on D.1 c.1.Google Scholar

²³ Loc.cit.; cf. ibid. fol. 261^r and 254^v .Google Scholar

²⁴ Ibid. fol. 254^rb .Google Scholar

²⁵ Ibid. fol. 258^rb, on D.1 c.6.Google Scholar

²⁶ Cf. DDC 6. 1209.Google Scholar

²⁷ Op.cit. fol. 258^rb .Google Scholar

²⁸ Ibid. fol. 255^va, on D.1 c.2. He could have had in mind Summa Theol. 1^a 2^ae q.96 a.4 concl.Google Scholar

²⁹ Cf. Black, A. J., ‘The Political Ideas of Conciliarism and Papalism, 1430–1450,’ JEH 20 (1969) 47–50. — Other, minor points of interest in this fragment are: (1) He asserts that custom counts as law — another Thomist proposition — and deduces thus, ‘ex quo infero quod si compromittitur in aliquem ut pronuntiat secundum legem, secundum ius, quod non excluditur facultas iudicandi secundum consuetudinem scriptam vel non scriptam’ (fol. 253^vb, on D.1 c.1). (2) After discussing the view, currently championed by the Hussites, that the validity of a judge depends ‘ex merito vite’; and calling attention to the Archdeacon in the same vein, he concludes with a somewhat ambiguous statement on the principle of ex officio validation: ‘ex officio suo, servata iudiciarii ordinis integritate’ (fol. 255^rb, on D.1 c.2). (3) He discusses textual problems in considerable detail. He comments, on the rubrics of the Decretum, that they were composed either by Gratian ‘quod tamen non creditur,’ or by a disciple or someone else, which he thinks more likely (fol. 251^vb, on D.1 § Supremus illud). This shows an awareness that historical study was relevant to problems of legal interpretation; and elsewhere he says, ‘nota … quod cronice sunt allegabiles’ (fol. 251^r, on D.1 § Supremus illud).Google Scholar