¹ Gillmann, F., ‘Wo war Vincentius Hispanus Bischof? ’ AKKR 113 (1933) 99–107.Google Scholar

² F. de Almeida, Historia da Igreja em Portugal (Coimbra 1910) 368, 381, 393, 622–3; Reuter, A. E., Königtum und Episkopat in Portugal im 13. Jahrhundert (Abh. zur mittleren und neueren Geschichte 69; Berlin 1928) 14, 20, 24, 28, 32 etc.; further bibliography in Ochoa, op. cit. n. 3 infra, 81ff.; and A. D. de Sousa Costa, in a forthcoming monograph.Google Scholar

³ Ochoa, J. Sanz, ‘Problemas biográficos de Vincentius Hispanus,’ Congrès de Droit canonique médiéval … 1958 (Bibliothèque de la RHE 33; Louvain 1959) 162–73; idem, Vincentius Hispanus: Canonista boloñes del siglo XIII (Cuadernos del Instituto Jurídico Español 13; Rome-Madrid 1960) 76–112.Google Scholar

⁴ Hurter, H., Nomenclator literarius theologiae catholicae (3rd ed. Innsbruck 1903–13) II 302: ‘… episcopus, ut videtur, caesaraugustanus …’Google Scholar

⁵ See the subscriptions, Ochoa, Vinc. Hisp. 100f. Google Scholar

⁶ See esp. the sections ibid. 87–99, 102–11. Even the presence of a copy of the ‘aparado de Vicent’ in the list of books of a bishop-elect of Cuenca in 1289 is supposed to prove that the book was in Cuenca because its author was (fifty years earlier I) bishop of the neighboring Zaragoza, p. 109–10. Google Scholar

⁷ Cf. Reuter, , op. cit. 14; Ochoa, op. cit. 82f.Google Scholar

⁸ Compare, e.g., the career of Richard Poore, the later bishop of Chichester (1215), Salisbury (1217), and Durham (1228–37); as dean of Salisbury (1197–1214) he was Parisius commorans when Innocent III appointed him judge delegate in a lawsuit in 1209 (Potthast 3590; X 1.4.8). Google Scholar

⁹ As Ochoa argues, 84–5. Google Scholar

¹⁰ See the thema and solutio in Kuttner, ‘Bernardus Compostellanus Antiquus,’ Traditio 1 (1943) 325, with an emendation by Fransen, G., ‘Deux collections de questiones,’ this Bulletin for 1965, Trad. 21.497 No. 8.Google Scholar

¹¹ Cf. Lawrence, C. H., St. Edmund of Abingdon: A Study in Hagiography (Oxford 1960) 14 -18, 59–60 etc.; idem, ‘The Thirteenth Century,’ in The English Church and the Papacy in the Middle Ages (ed. Lawrence, C. H. New York 1965) 154–5; on Archbishop Albert see also Hellmann, M. s.v. in LThK² 1 (1957) 281.Google Scholar

¹² Mart, E. ène et Durand, U., Thesaurus novus anecd. (Paris 1717) III 1846–7. On Martène's source, Auxerre MS 123 (from Pontigny), see Lawrence, , St. Edmund 8ff.Google Scholar

¹³ The others: Master John of Toledo, Cist, O., later cardinal-bishop of Porto and vicar of Rome (t 1275; cf. Vincke, J., s.v. in LThK² 5.1092); Guillermo Talliante, O.S.B. Abbot of St. Facundus, dioc. of León (t 1250), Guido of Laon, bishop of Cambrai. See Eubel, , Hierarchia cath. I under the respective sees or tituli. Google Scholar

¹⁴ Ochoa's observations on Mestre Vicente of Idanha-Guarda at the council of ‘León’ (p. 90) are gratuitous. Google Scholar

¹ ‘ Bernardus Compostellanus antiquus,’ Traditio 1 (1943) 310, with nn. 6–8 on Silvester's work and career; cf. also I. da Rosa Pereira, ‘Silvestre Godinho, um canonista português,’ Lumen, July 1962 (offprint, 8 pp.).Google Scholar

² For other contents of Zwettl 162 see art. cit. 323 n. 18. Google Scholar

³ God. 3.4.1, 3.1.5; Dig. 2.1.5. The arrangement of this gloss is not clear at first sight: the text ‘Nullo personarum …’ appears underneath the references, with a reference mark after ‘ut’, which is repeated in the three lines above. There, the ‘contra’ text (Dig. 2.1.5) constitutes the first line, but a check mark is placed against ‘C. qui pro sua …’ to indicate the beginning. Google Scholar

⁴ 1 Comp. 1.21.4, cf. X 1.29.3; — Dig. 6.1.38. Google Scholar

⁵ Dig. 1.21.5. Google Scholar

⁶ See Gillmann, F., ‘Magister Silvester als Glossator,’ AKKR 106 (1926) 149; Kuttner, Repertorium 18.Google Scholar

⁷ The distribution is tabulated in Kuttner, ‘The Collection of Alanus: a Concordance …’ Rivista di storia del diritto italiano 26 (1953) 44. Google Scholar

⁸ See the, e.g. gloss Consuluit, v. malitiose (supra) and gl. § Cum autem, v. app. remota procedat (infra).Google Scholar

⁹ M ‘Super consultationibus’ (and ‘Super consultationum’ in the next gloss) is a scribal mistake, probably caused by confusion of q and 9 (= con). The decretal ‘Super consultatione’, of which Innocent denied the authorship, cannot be meant; neither of its two parts (Alan. W 4.11.3 and W 2.13.8 [= Alan. 2.15.10]) fits the topic of the reference. Google Scholar

¹⁰ Compare the glosses of the Apparatus ‘Servus appellatur’ on 3 Comp. 1.4.4 v. in postulatione: ‘Set quare hoc dicis …?’; 2.18.2 v. perpetuum: ‘Set quo abiere omnia iura tua, o tu innocenti …?’; 5.11.2 v. Licet … insufficientes nos … reputemus: ‘Quare ergo ascendisti? …’ — all printed and attributed to Laurentius by Gillmann, F., Des Laurentius Hispanus Apparat … (Mainz 1935) 93–5. These glosses may well be by Silvester.Google Scholar

¹¹ Maitland, in a delightful passage (Roman Canon Law in the Church of England, London 1898 p. 126), admired the patience of Innocent, who ‘… set himself down to answer this lengthy examination paper’; quoted by Cheney, C. R. and Semple, W. H., Selected Letters of Pope Innocent III concerning England (London Edinburgh etc. 1953) 69 n. 1. Text and translation of ‘Pastoralis’ ibid. 69–78.Google Scholar

¹² See Kuttner, , art. cit. (n. 1) 337 n. 43; Ullmann, W., ‘Honorius III and the Prohibition of Legal Studies,’ Juridical Review 60 (1948) 178f.Google Scholar

¹³ The date considered most likely by Stickler, A., ‘Alanus Anglicus …,’ Salesianum 21 (1959) 373.Google Scholar

¹⁴ See Weigand, R., ‘Neue Mitteilungen aus Handschriften,’ this Bulletin for 1965, Trad. 21.490, where also the use of the variant initium is noted.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Cf. Weigand 489 n. 32. Google Scholar

¹ Kuttner, S., in this Bulletin for 1963, Trad. 19.533–4.Google Scholar

² Stickler, A. M., ‘Der Dekretist Willielmus Vasco … Études Le Bras (Paris 1965) 705–28.Google Scholar

³ Ibid. 712 cf. 718.Google Scholar

⁴ See R. von Heckel, ‘Die Dekretalensammlungen des Gilbertus und Alanus …,’ ZRG Kan. Abt. 29 (1940) 121 n. 1, 125, 166 for MS D. 14 as the exemplar from which the text was copied in MSS D. 5 and D. 3a. Already Stickler, art. cit. 716 feels there should be no doubt as to the identity. Google Scholar

⁵ Gillmann, F., Einteilung und System des Gratianischen Dekrets … (Erweiterter Sonder-Abdruck aus AKKR 106; Mainz 1926) 102 n. 3 [not in the original article]; Zur Inventarisierung der kanonistischen Handschriften … (Anhang zum erweiterten Sonder-Abdruck von ‘Des Johannes Galensis Apparat …’ aus AKKR 118; Mainz 1938) 64 n. 2–66 n. 1. (Thus Heckel, art. cit. 121 n. 1 could believe the text to be unpublished.)Google Scholar

⁶ Vetulani, A., ‘Les manuscrits du Décret de Gratien … dans les bibliothèques polonaises,’ SG 1 (1953) 227. On the glosses of the Gniezno MS see Weigand, R. ‘Neue Mitteilungen aus Handschriften,’ this Bulletin for 1965, Trad. 21.480, 482–5: Bernard of Compostella's apparatus, preceded by this introductory gloss of Vasco, W. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁷ This lengthy section is printed by Gillmann, Zur Inventarisierung 64(-65) n. 2, ‘Missurus in mundum — et aptarent’; Einteilung 103 (102 n. 3) ‘Verumtamen — subiacere’; Zur Invent. 65 (64 n. 2) ‘Isti ergo ueri sunt — (66) benignitatem declinemus.’ Google Scholar

⁸ Einteilung 102 n. 3.Google Scholar

⁹ Of this section (beg. ‘Tractaturus igitur’ Gren.; ‘Tractaturus itaque’ Fuld.) Gillmann printed only a few sentences, Zur Invent. 66 n. 1. Google Scholar

¹⁰ I am grateful to Miss Hanenburg for pointing out by letter the identity of the Gniezno gloss with the unpublished portion of ‘Missurus in mundum’; collation with the Grenoble gloss (preserved only in part) leads to the same conclusion. Google Scholar

¹¹ Stickler, , art. cit. 712; Grenoble fol. 206^va.Google Scholar

¹ Caprioli, S., ‘De “modis arguendi” scripta rariora: 1.(-5),’ Studi Senesi ³ 12 (1963) 30–56. 107–90, 230–53; 14 (1965) 355–414. In a wider sense, of course, the more elaborate discussion of loci in the Summula de presumptionibus, in Pillius’ Libellus disputatorius and certain brocarda is also related to this type of writing.Google Scholar

² Troyes 936 (=T) fol. 117^va; Worcester F. 159 (=W) fol. 185^rb). For convenience, identification of the legal texts cited is here included with the apparatus of variants. Google Scholar

³ Cf. Repertorium 318 n. 1; Kuttner, ‘Analecta iuridica Vaticana,’ Collectanea Vaticana in honorem Card A. M. Albareda I (Studi e Testi 219; Città del Vaticano 1962) 422 n. 1 (on the first rec.). For other contents of the Worcester MS see Repert. 230, 237, 394, 401, 403, 404, 407, 409, 411, 413, 415, 427; ‘Analecta …’ 434ff.; also a set of Historie decretorum (fol. 177^ra-181^vb). Google Scholar

⁴ No. 4 in the Catalogue, no folios given. (Only fols. 114^v-119^r are available at the Institute.) Google Scholar

⁵ (1) ‘Sapiencia edificauit … satisfactione remittitur’ (fol. 115^ra-115^va; not identical with the prologue from the Anglo-Norman school; this Bulletin for 1955, Trad. 11. 448); (2) ‘Dicit Salomon … et non iudicabimini. § Vidit Iacob scalam … set frequentissime manducatur’ (fol. 115^va-115^rb, followed by verses ‘O felix mortale genus …,’ expl. fol. 116^va; a prologue ‘Vidit Iacob scalam’ in Laon MS 371bis fol. 115^vb [between C. 1 and C. 2 of the Anglo-Norman Summa De iure canonico tractaturus] is related to this; the allegorical use of Gen. 28.12 and Act. 10.11–14 in both may come from Alanus of Lille, De arte praedicatoria, PL 210.111A-C); (3) ‘In omnibus rebus id esse perfectum … et rependat, qui uiuit et regnat etcet.’ (fol. 116^va-117^va). These all will be discussed in Dr. Hanenburg*s forthcoming study (cf. supra, ‘Willielmus Vasco* at note 10). Google Scholar

¹ In reproducing texts from the ed. Lipsiensis secunda, Friedberg's typographical and spelling conventions will be maintained. Google Scholar

² Fransen, G., ‘Les diverses formes de la Compilatio prima,’ Mélanges historiques Étienne Van Cauwenbergh (Louvain 1961) 243.Google Scholar

³ There is reason to doubt it, since otherwise the variant would have been recorded in n.2 to X 1.29.19 ‘Lucius III. Cantuariensi Archiepiscopo et eius Suffraganeis.’ Google Scholar

⁴ See Fransen p. 241 No. 13 (with a printing error, ‘post 1.21.3 tr….’; corr. 1.21.23), 247. Google Scholar

⁵ Cf. proleg. col. xli; on the earlier attempt of Contius to combine the texts of Gregory IX and the Compilationes see ibid.; Schulte, Gesch. QL II 23. Google Scholar

⁶ More than twenty collections, according to Holtzmann's papers; also the appendix of Rainer of Pomposa in the Reims MS (Repertorium 310, without identification). Google Scholar

⁷ Cf. Heckel, ‘Die Dekretalensammlungen…’ ZRG Kan. Abt. 29 (1940) 279, who indicates the extension of the text by reference to the lines in Migne, without adverting to Friedberg's omission. The Vercelli MS (A 3.22.3) agrees with W. Google Scholar

⁸ See X 2.26.16 between nn. 7 and 8 Friedb. Google Scholar

⁹ Bern. 1.25.7 ‘Idem Parisiensi archiepo. Cum ex officii sui debito. Et infra. Tu quoque —ignorat’ (Singer p. 53). Google Scholar