We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 July 2016
At a certain moment in his life Ramon Llull became convinced that if his great projects were ever to be realized, he would have to gain the support of the leading rulers of Christendom. The Crown of Aragon was not enough. God had revealed to him a universal Art for the conversion of infidels, a paradigm of all knowledge, a general method for contemplation, and Llull naturally deemed it vital that this revelation should become known throughout the world. Some thirteen years after his illumination, Llull decided to go to Paris, to address the most powerful monarch in Europe and defend his ideas before the most prestigious university in the western world.
1 I wish to thank Lola Badia, Anthony Bonner, and very specially Hillgarth, J. N. for kindly reading several drafts of this paper and helping to improve it with their comments. I am indebted also to Robert Archer for the English version of the article. I am grateful to the Institut de Recherche et d’Histoire des Textes of the CNRS and to the Section des Manuscrits Occidentaux of the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, for the facilities they gave me during my research. I use the following abbreviations: BN: Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris; MOG: Raymundi Lulli Opera Omnia, ed. Ivo Salzinger, 8 vols. (Mainz, 1721–42); ORL: Obres de Ramon Lull, ed. Salvador Galmés et al., 21 vols. (Palma de Mallorca, 1906–50); OS: Anthony Bonner, Obres selectes de Ramon Llull (1232–1316), 2 vols. (Palma de Mallorca, 1989); ROL: Raymundi Lulli Opera latina, ed. Friedrich Stegmüller et al., 18 vols. (vols. 1–5 Palma, 1959–67; vols. 6–18 Turnhout, 1975–91); SW: Anthony Bonner, Selected Works of Ramon Llull, 2 vols. (Princeton, 1985).Google Scholar
Llull arrived in Paris after a fruitless visit to Rome. The Vita coaetanea, IV, 18 (ROL 8: 283) recounts that he arrived at the Roman curia shortly after the death of Pope Honorius IV (3 April 1287). Because of this event and the delay in electing a new pope, Llull “direxit versus Parisius gressus suos ad communicandum ibidem mundo, quam sibi dederat Deus, Artem.” Albert Soler, “El Liber super Psalmum Quicumque de Ramon Llull i l'opció pels tàrtars,” Studia Lulliana 32 (1992):3–19.Google Scholar
2 The reason why this possibility has received little attention is that the connection between Llull and Peter of Limoges is not immediately evident. Peter did not compose any compilations of Lullian material like those of Thomas Le Myésier, for whom see Hillgarth, J. N., Ramon Lull and Lullism in Fourteenth-Century France (Oxford, 1971).Google Scholar
3 Although some of the works contained in these manuscripts have been published and some have not, in the interest of simplicity I have italicized all of their titles here. For an exhaustive description of the manuscripts see Albert Soler, “Els manuscrits lul.lians de Pere de Llemotges,” Llengua & Literatura 5 (forthcoming). Peter's library passed to the Sorbonne. The provenance of the great majority of his books is attested by the acquisition note found on their last folios. Unless otherwise indicated, the dates and location of the Lullian works follow Bonner, OS 2: 539–600 (the Catalan version of his SW, with an updated catalog of works). A question mark indicates that it is impossible at present to specify in which of the years indicated the work was written.Google Scholar
4 William's work was no doubt added to those of Llull by Peter himself. Soler, “Encara sobre la data del Blaquerna,” Studia Lulliana 31 (1991): 114 ff. The work is often cited and appears in catalogs under a title derived from the prologue, “Commendacio antiquorum sapientum et artificiorum.” Hillgarth, Ramon Lull, 158 n. 42, 165 n. 65.Google Scholar
5 French version of the Llibre d’Evast e Blanquerna (Book of Evast and Blanquerna). For the date see Soler, “El Liber super Psalmum Quicumque.”Google Scholar
6 The much-disputed date of this novel is discussed by Soler, “Encara sobre la data.”Google Scholar
7 The Epistolae were edited (from a MS now lost) by Edmond Martène and Ursin Durand, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum (Paris, 1717), 1: cols. 1315–19. They have been dated as ca. 1300; Hillgarth, Ramon Lull, 50 n. 12, argues convincingly that they belong to Llull's first visit to Paris. See also Anthony Bonner, “Notes de Bibliografia i cronologia lul.lianes,” Estudios Lulianos 24 (1980): 80 n. 34. Hillgarth's identification of the “friend” of the third letter with “an (unnamed) prelate” is presumably based on the use of the term “reverenda paternitas.”Google Scholar
8 Martène and Durand, Thesaurus novus 1: col. 1318.Google Scholar
9 Llull, Ramon, Libre de meravelles. ed. Galmés, S. (Barcelona, 1934), 4: 107 ff.Google Scholar
‘Son,’ replied the hermit, ‘a man who had long labored for the good of the Roman Church came to Paris and spoke to the king of France and to the University of Paris about establishing monasteries in Paris for teaching the languages of the unbelievers, and about translating the Ars demonstrativa into these languages and sending people with this Ars demonstrativa to the Tartars to preach to them and show them the Art; and also about bringing some of these people to Paris to teach them our alphabet and language and then sending them back to their country. All these things and many others he asked of the king and the University of Paris, trying at the same time to have them confirmed by the pope and established in perpetuity.’
The translation is by Bonner, SW 2: 982. For the date of the work see ibid., 655.
10 For the Disputatio see MOG 4 [Int. VI]: 1. The Vita coaetanea IV, 19 continues: “Veniens ergo Raimundus Parisius tempore cancellarii Bertoldi, legit ibidem in aula sua commentum Artis generalis de speciali praecepto praedicti cancellarii.” For the identification proposed see Bonner, “Notes de Bibliografia,” 79. The fact that the Commentum and the Disputatio are found in the same MS supports the idea that both works were written at the same time in Paris.Google Scholar
11 Soler, “El Liber” (as in n. 1).Google Scholar
12 Anthony Bonner, “La situación del Libre del gentil dentro de la enseñanza luliana en Miramar,” Estudios Lulianos 22 (1978): 49–55.Google Scholar
13 We cannot be sure that all the Lullian MSS that Peter of Limoges possessed have been preserved. The catalog of the Sorbonne library in the early fourteenth century (Léopold Delisle, Le cabinet des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque nationale, 4 vols. [Paris, 1868–81], 3: 8–114) tells us that, apart from the MSS donated by Peter and by Llull himself, there were three further Lullian volumes: a miscellany, containing works like the De adventu Messiae or the Liber amici et amati; an unidentifiable Ars Raymundi; and an Ars demonstrativa. These volumes may well have belonged to Peter; see Soler, “Encara sobre la data,” 116 ff.Google Scholar
14 The first obituary, dated 3 November 1306, reads:Google Scholar
Obiit magister Petrus de Lemovicis, quondam socius domus, canonicus ebroicensis qui refutavit duos episcopatus et bis prebendas parisius, baccalarius in theologia, magnus astronomus, qui legavit domui plus quam vixx [120] volumina exceptis quibusdam caternis magne reputationis pitancia x. sol. par.
(Palémon Glorieux, Aux origines de la Sorbonne [Paris, 1966], 1: 176). The second contains two notes; the first, of 14 January, reads: “Commemoratio magistri Petri de Lemovicis, ebroicensis canonici”; the other, of 9 November, states: “Obitus magistri Petri de Lemovicis, diaconi, canonici ebroicensis, qui dedit quatuor libras et quinque solidos turonensium” (Delisle, Le cabinet 2: 168). Bernard Gui, “Nomina episcoporum lemovicensium,” Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France 21 (1857): 756, is particularly important. Gui (ca. 1261–1331) was Peter's contemporary and countryman.
Post decessum vero domini Girberti, sequenti mense Augusti vel Septembris [1294] electus fuit in episcopum lemovicensem, in concordia capituli universi, cum maximo gaudio totius patriae subsecuto, dominus Petrus de Seperia, de parrochia Donzeniaci lemovicensis dioecesis oriundus, canonicus Ebroycensis, vir per omnia laude dignus, magnus et famosus clericus in scripturis tam philosophis quam divinis. Qui electionem canonicam et concordem, per viros sollempnes, canonicos ejusdem ecclesiae lemovicensis, sibi portatam et oblatam ex parte capituli, in Ebroycensi sede, ubi canonicus residebat, noluit acceptare; sed humiliter se excusans eam penitus recusavit. Unde canonici ad electionem alterius processerunt. Hic etiam Petrus alias recusaverat accipere oblatum sibi ex parte summi pontificatus episcopatum Albiensem. Hic vir, memoria semper dignus, obiit apud Blaviam, dum rediret Burdegalis, anno domini M.CCC.VI.
15 Information from other sources presents the often insuperable problem of homonyms. There is no general study of Peter of Limoges. The studies available deal with specific issues and sometimes merely repeat information contained in earlier works. I have used the following works: Lecoy, A. de la Marche, La chaire française au moyen âge, spécialement au xiiie siècle (Paris, 1868); Delisle, Le cabinet, and idem “Inventaire des manuscrits latins de la Bibliothèque Nationale provenant du fons de la Sorbonne,” Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes 31 (1870): 1–50, 135–61; Hauréau, B. “Pierre de Limoges, chanoine d’Évreux,” Histoire littéraire de la France 26 (1873): 460–67; Clément-Simon, G. “Notice de quelques manuscrits d'une bibliothèque limousine,” Bulletin de la Société scientifique, historique et archéologique de La Corrèze 15 (1893): 299–317, 467–70; Spettmann, H. “Das Schriftchen ‘De oculo morali’ und sein Verfasser,” Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 16 (1923): 309–22; Th. Welter, J., L'exemplum dans la littérature religieuse et didactique du moyen âge (Paris, 1927); Glorieux, P., Répertoire des maîtres en théologie de Paris au xiiie siècle (Paris, 1933); idem, “Nouvelle candidature pour le commentaire sur les Sentences de Paris Nat. lat. 16407,” Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale 22 (1955): 312–22; and idem, Aux origines; Thorndike, L. “Peter of Limoges on the comet of 1299,” Isis 36 (1945): 3–6, and Latin Treatises on Comets between 1238 and 1368 A.D. (Chicago, 1950); Birkenmajer, A. “Pierre de Limoges commentateur de Richard de Fournival,” Isis 40 (1949): 18–31; Rouse, R. H. “The Early Library of the Sorbonne,” Scriptorium 21 (1967): 42–71, 227–51; Mabille, M. “Pierre de Limoges, copiste de manuscrits,” Scriptorium 24 (1970): 45–48, and “Pierre de Limoges et ses méthodes de travail,” Hommages à André Boutemy (Brussels, 1976), 244–51; Schneyer, J. B., Repertorium der lateinischen Sermones des Mittelalters, für die Zeit von 1150–1350 4 (Münster, 1972); M.-Th. d’Alverny, “Un adversaire de saint Thomas: Petrus Iohannis Olivi,” St. Thomas Aquinas, 1274–1974: Commemorative Studies (Toronto, 1974): 2: 179–218; Schleusener, G.-Eichholz, “Naturwissenschaft und Allegorese: Der ‘Tractatus de oculo morali’ des Petrus von Limoges,” Frühmittelalterliche Studien 12 (1978): 258–309; N. Bériou, “La prédication au béguinage de Paris pendant l'année liturgique 1272–1273,” Recherches augustiniennes 13 (1978): 105–97; eadem, “Pierre de Limoges et la fin des temps,” Mélanges de l’École française de Rome 98–1 (1986): 65–107; eadem, La prédication de Ranulphe de la Houblonnière: sermons aux clercs et aux simples gens à Paris au xiiie siècle (Paris, 1987); L.-J. Bataillon, “Graphie et ponctuation chez quelques maîtres universitaires du XIIIe siècle,” Grafia e interpunzione del latino nel medioevo (Rome, 1984), pp. 153–65; idem, “Les problèmes de l’édition des sermons et des ouvrages pour prédicateurs au xiiie siècle,” The Editing of Theological and Philosophical Texts from the Middle Ages, ed. Monika Aztelos (Stockholm, 1986), 105–20; idem, “Comptes de Pierre de Limoges pour la copie de livres,” La production du livre universitaire au moyen âge: Exemplar et pecia, ed. Bataillon et al. (Paris, 1988), 265–73.Google Scholar
16 These sermons appear in BN Lat. 15971, fols. 69r-198r.Google Scholar
17 The College of the Sorbonne was restricted to students of theology who were already masters of arts and did not belong to a religious order. This suggests that Peter of Limoges fulfilled these prerequisites. It has been suggested that our Peter could be the homonymous dean of the Faculty of Medicine, documented between 1267 and 1270. Hauréau, “Pierre de Limoges,” 462, denies this; Delisle, Le cabinet 2: 169, and Thorndike, in Isis 36: 3, argue in favor. Bériou, “Pierre,” 69 merely raises the question of whether Peter interrupted his theological studies to assume this post.Google Scholar
18 Bériou, “La prédication,” 108 n. 13, notes: “Le manuscrit Paris B. N. lat. 16390, que m'a signalé le P. L.-J. Bataillon, contient aux fol. 9ra–14ra un ensemble d'actes universitaires reportés de sa main, qui pourraient bien marquer les étapes de sa formation théologique jusqu’à la maîtrise incluse.” In a later article (“Pierre” [as in n. 15], 69 n. 18) Bériou remarks that Peter is not considered a master “peut-être parce qu'il ne fut pas maître-régent.” Hillgarth, Ramon Lull (as in n. 2), 158, suggests that our Peter could be the person summoned in 1302 by Boniface VIII to the Council of Rome.Google Scholar
19 See n. 30, below.Google Scholar
20 Bernard Gui (as in n. 14) appears to state that Peter of Limoges was already canon of Évreux when he was offered the bishopric of Albi; according to Hauréau “Pierre de Limoges,” 463, this was between 1271 and 1275.Google Scholar
21 See nn. 14, 20, above. In the De oculo morali Peter openly, and at times harshly, criticizes church dignitaries. Thus (Spettmann, “Das Schriftchen,” 312 n. 4): “Modo vergente mundi vespere videmus Praelatos Ecclesiae a statu perfectionis pristinae plus quam laicos cecidisse … Praelatorum … modernorum pars quaedam ferrea est per cordis duritiam, et quaedam fictilis per carnis luxuriam.” Spettmann remarks: “Seine Kritik geht nicht selten auf die moderna tempora. Sie ist manchmal recht frei und offen und geht besonders häufig gegen die moderni praelati. Aber die Kritik ist sachlich gehalten. Der Verfasser schliesst sich selbst mit ein. Vor allem ist es die Benefizienkumulation, die im Schmerz macht, dann aber auch die Trägheit und die Geldgier der praelati maiores und minores, mit einem Worte: ihr weltlicher Sinn.” Peter's refusal of important positions is similar to the attitudes adopted by his friends Robert of Sorbon and Gerard of Reims (Bériou, “Pierre,” 70).Google Scholar
22 BN Lat. 16481, fol. 186r-188v.Google Scholar
23 Rouse, “The Early Library,” 243, deduces the date of the donation from the early fourteenth-century catalogs of the Sorbonne. He also notes (p. 227) that Peter's collection is the “second largest known gift to the medieval library.”Google Scholar
24 For example, the first chapter describes how the pupil, foundation of the “virtus visiva,” is protected by seven elements: two liquid (humores), the tela, three tunicae, and the palpebrae. Peter then draws a parallel with the seven capital virtues (“pro spiritualis pupillae in anima perfecta custodia”), and establishes further allegorical correspondence. Spettmann, “Das Schriftchen,” and Schleusener-Eichholz, “Naturwissenschaft und Allegorese.” The latter lists 158 MSS of the De oculo. To her list of editions one should add that of Arnao Guillén de Brocar (Logroño, 1503). There is no modern edition (See Bataillon, “Les problèmes” [as in n. 15]).Google Scholar
25 For the first work see Birkenmajer, “Pierre de Limoges,” and Thorndike, Latin Treatises (as in n. 15); for the second, Thorndike, “Peter of Limoges,” 3–6. Another treatise on the comet of 1301 is less clearly by Peter (Thorndike, Latin Treatises, 203–7).Google Scholar
26 Two sermons of 1273, “In dominica Quinquagesimae,” and “In Coena Domini,” are preserved in BN Lat. 16481, fols. 124v and 186r. The latter was preached in the Sainte-Chapelle. A sermon of 1280, preached to the Franciscans, is in Lat. 15972, fol. 177r. There are two of uncertain date, one “In festivitate Vincentii, S.,” preached to the Carthusians (Lat. 16501, fol. 277v), the other sub voce “Dives,” in Lat. 16482. It is doubtful if the sermon of 1260 “In die Germani”, S. (Lat. 15971) is by Peter (see Bériou, “Pierre” [as in n. 15], 70 n. 22). Glorieux, Répertoire (as in n. 15), 366, lists some works of doubtful attribution. The many fragments and short works of uncertain authorship in Peter's MSS may include some of his original works.Google Scholar
27 See the inventory of existing manuscripts in Soler, “Els manuscrits lul.lians” (as in n. 3).Google Scholar
28 Peter's Liber magnus iudiciorum (BN Lat. 7320) originally had at least 339 folios. It still contains astrological treatises by Almansor (fols. 37r-40v), William the Englishman (fols. 40v-43v), the pseudo-Hippocrates (fols. 44r-47v), Abraham ibn Ezra (fols. 44r–46r, in the margins), Messahala (fols. 48r-58r), and Ptolemy's Quadripartitum in the version of Plato of Tivoli (fols. 61r–104v). There are many references to this compilation in other volumes in Peter's library. See Birkenmajer, “Pierre de Limoges” (as in n. 15).Google Scholar
29 Peter copied at least BN Lat. 7434 (fols. 49r-59r), 15845 (fols. 200r-208r), 15971; Lat. 16390 (fols. 1r-14r); Lat. 16396 (fols. 48r-108r); Lat. 16407, 16482 (fols. 285r-349r); Lat. 16501 (see Mabille, “Pierre de Limoges, copiste” and “Pierre de Limoges et ses méthodes” [as in n. 15]); to this one must add Lat. 16482 (fols. 350r-356r); Lat. 15972 (fols. 133r-155r, 174r-177r); Lat. 16614 (fol. 122r), and Lat. 16658 (fols. 31v-32r). Lat. 16397 is an example of a MS that he corrected (Bériou, “Pierre” [as in n. 15], 78).Google Scholar
30 Mabille, “Pierre de Limoges et ses méthodes,” 250. See, for instance, BN Lat. 16481, a collection made at Peter's instigation of 219 sermons preached in Paris by various clerics, including Peter himself, between 28 October 1272 and 12 November 1273. Each sermon has a precise heading which states not only its author's name and his order or ecclesiastical rank but also the date and place of delivery. The MS is complemented by Lat. 16482, mostly copied by the same scribe; this is a collection of Distinctiones, arranging in alphabetical order part of the material found in 16481. Peter made these two remarkable compilations so as to have at hand models for his own preaching (Bériou, “La prédication” [as in n. 15], 112).Google Scholar
31 For Giles see BN Lat. 15863, 16122, 16124, 16157, 16616, 16681; for Nicholas Lat. 15212–15213, 15576, 15598, and 16485.Google Scholar
32 BN Lat. 15559, 15588. d’Alverny (“Un adversaire” [as in n. 15], 193) noted the fact that Peter owned works by someone as controversial as Olieu:Google Scholar
Il est possible qu'il ait connu Pierre Jean Olieu, puisque celui-ci a fait des études à Paris et y a peut-être enseigné, mais la curiosité d'esprit et les tendances éclectiques de Pierre de Limoges suffisent à justifier l'acquisition d'un bel exemplaire de la Postilla in Matthaeum et d'autres commentaires bibliques du Frère Mineur.
33 BN Lat. 16397; Bériou, “Pierre” (as in n. 15), 94. On p. 71 Bériou states that Peter also owned works by Arnau of Vilanova, but she does not specify which they were nor supply a source for this information. So far I have not found any work by Arnau among Peter's MSS. In the sermon preached in 1273 “post prandium” before the king (BN Lat. 16481, fol. 186r-188v) Peter himself adopted a somewhat radical attitude. For instance:Google Scholar
Si rex francie serviret cras in aliqua cena, quia faceret bene diceretur quod cena esset plenaria et magna. Sed sic fecit rex glorie hodie unum; ipse dixit: ‘Ego autem in medio vestrum sum, sicut qui ministrat.’ Scilicet sanctum sacramentum illius[?] carnis[?] secundo ferculi preciositas quia ista cena fuit de suo precioso corpore, qui erat verus Deus et verus homo, quod corpus erat unum preciosum quod nichil in terra poterat ei comparari. Hoc bene verum est quod erat pauper de auro et argento, quia hec ista preciosa sunt in conspectu eius; ipse enim qui ea creavit scit eorum valorem.
34 For full references see Soler, “Els manuscrits lul.lians” (as in n. 3). The only Lullian MS in which Peter did not make a single annotation is BN Lat. 16112, which contains the Disputatio fidelis et infidelis and the Compendium seu commentum Artis demonstrativae. Google Scholar
35 Various parts of the novel are structured around a prayer (the Ave Maria or the Gloria) or a basic doctrinal scheme (the seven mortal sins or the seven virtues). Schleicher, W., Ramon Lulls Libre de Evast e Blanquerna (Geneva-Paris, 1958), 148, remarks: “Ramón Lull gibt in seinem Blanquerna-Roman innerhalb der vielen behandelten Themen auch Richtlinien für die Predigt.”Google Scholar
36 MOG, 2: 99 ff.Google Scholar
37 Contra Hauréau, “Pierre de Limoges” (as in n. 15), 463; Mabille, “Pierre de Limoges et ses méthodes” (as in n. 15), 244. Le Myésier, who was to become Llull's main follower in Paris, could have met him in 1287–89, when he was a young socius of the Sorbonne (Hillgarth, Ramon Lull [as in n. 2], 159), but it is improbable that he then possessed much influence. The relation between the two men is documented definitely only from July 1299, when Llull replied, from Paris, to the fifty Quaestiones Le Myésier sent him from Arras, where he was a canon. However (Hillgarth, 161), these questions already “reveal considerable knowledge of Lull's different writings.” For the Carthusian monastery at Vauvert see n. 45, below.Google Scholar
38 Hillgarth, , Ramon Lull, 49, asserts “The Vita and other sources provide evidence that Lull was received by Philippe le Bel on each of his three main visits to Paris.” But on this point the Vita says nothing. The passage from the Llibre de meravelles (as in n. 9) is the only indication of personal contact with the king. Llull certainly tried to establish contact through his Epistola ad regem (as in n. 7).Google Scholar
39 See the Vita coaetanea (as in n.10). Bertaut de Saint Denis was elected chancellor of the university in December 1288. Riedlinger, H., ROL 5 (1967): 115; Hillgarth, Ramon Lull, 152 ff. The Vita continues: “Perlectoque Parisius illo commento, ac ibidem viso modo scholarium, ad Montem rediit Pessulanum.” Le Myésier has a note in the margin of this passage in his Electorium (BN Lat. 15450; Hillgarth, Ramon Lull, 354): “1289.” At that time the year in France began on Easter day. In 1290 Easter fell on 2 April and up to this date Le Myésier may have considered the year to be 1289. On this stay in Montpellier and the composition of the Ars inventiva see Soria, A., ROL 3 (1961); Armand Llinarès, “Raymond Lulle à Montepellier: La refonte du ‘Grand Art’,” Cahiers de Fanjeaux 22 (1987): 17–32.Google Scholar
40 Soler, “Encara sobre la data” (as in n. 4), 117.Google Scholar
41 My critical edition of the Llibre d'amic e amat (the first part of the fifth book of Blaquerna), to appear in the series Els Nostres Clàssics (Barcelona: Editorial Barcino), takes into account all the versions of this short work.Google Scholar
42 For the last two works see Soler, “El Liber“ (as in n. 1).Google Scholar
43 Tarré, J., “Los códices lulianos de la Biblioteca Nacional de Paris,” Analecta Sacra Tarraconensia 14 (1941): 160, alleged that Peter was the translator. It is perhaps unlikely that a leading intellectual with a group of collaborators at his disposal would himself undertake a translation. Occitan was certainly Peter's native language. In BN Lat. 15971 there are two passages in his hand in Occitan; they are incorporated into sermons by Robert of Sorbon. On fol. 171ra we have: “eu soy tot floritz e en arma e en cors quar me soy confessatz de bona voluntat;” on fol. 173va: “eu soy champio qui sui intratz el cham de la batalha per vos salvar.” These poetic comments on the theme of the sermon were apparently added by Peter.Google Scholar
44 See Soler, “El Liber.” One can dismiss the idea that Peter was the author of the Latin translation. This was made from an Occitanian version of the Catalan original; it contains misunderstandings that an Occitanian speaker would never have committed. See n. 41, above, and Charles Lohr and Fernando Domínguez, “Raimundus Lullus, ‘Liber amici et amati’: Introduction and critical text,” Traditio 44 (1988): 325–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
45 The first Lullian collection in Paris is only documented in the Carthusian monastery of Vauvert from 1298; see BN Lat. 16111, fol. i (Hillgarth, Ramon Lull, 157 n. 37).Google Scholar
46 Some of Peter's Lullian MSS (by then present in the Sorbonne) were apparently used by Thomas Le Myésier in his Electorium; see Hillgarth, , Ramon Lull, 383, 387, 392.Google Scholar
47 Llull was never easily influenced by others: he was too certain of the divine inspiration of his Art. I do not refer to a specific influence upon his system or doctrines but rather to a more subtle process of osmosis with the Parisian context in which Peter moved; this can perhaps be detected in Llull's less technical works written during these years. For instance, one could read the Llibre de meravelles in the light of the preaching of Peter and his colleagues.Google Scholar
