¹ Specific references for each of the statements in this and the following paragraph will be given below when the evidence for each of them is considered. The following additional abbreviations will be used: BMCL = Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law; Friedberg, = Decretum Magistri Gratiani, ed. Friedberg, Emil (Leipzig 1879); Kehr, = Italia pontificia , ed. Kehr, Paul F. (Berlin 1961–1975); Mittarelli, = Mittarelli, Giovanni and Costadono, Anselmo, Annates Camaldulenses Ordinis Sancti Benedicti (Venice 1858), 8 vols; Repertorium = Kuttner, Stephan, Repertorium der Kanonistik (Vatican City 1937); RHD = Revue d'histoire de droit; Robertson = Materials for the History of Thomas Becket , edd. Robertson, J. C. and Shephard, J. B. (London 1875–1885); RS = Rolls Series = Public Record Office, Rerum britannicarum medii aevi scriptores (London 1848–); Sarti, = Sarti, Mauro and Fattorini, Mauro, De Claris Archigymnasii bononiensis professoribus a saeculo XI ad saeculum XIV (Bologna, 1888–1896), 2 vols; SG = Studia Gratiana; ZSS = Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung. Google Scholar

² de Pastrengo, Guglielmo, De origine rerum, excerpted in Mittarelli III 323.Google Scholar

³ Martinus of Troppau, Chronicon Pontificum et Imperatorum, MGH-SS XXIV 469.Google Scholar

⁴ Ricolbaldi, Gervasio, Pomarium Ravennatis Ecclesiae sive Historia universalis, RIS² IX.Google Scholar

⁵ Rambaud-Buhot, Jacqueline, ‘Le legs de l'ancien droit: Gratien’ in L'Age classique (edd. Le Bras, G., Lefebvre, C., Rambaud, J.; Paris 1965) 49.Google Scholar

⁶ Brompton, John, Chronicon, ed. Twisden, Roger, Historiae anglicanae scriptores decem (London 1652) II 2388; Burselli, Girolama, Chronica gestorum ac factorum memorabilium civitatis Bononiae, RIS² XXIII 14.Google Scholar

⁷ Alberti, Gianbattista, Memorial Statute, excerpted in Brandileone, Francesco, ‘Notizie su Graziano e su Niccolo de Tudeschis,’ Studie e Memorie per la storia dell'Università de Bologna I (Bologna 1909) 10.Google Scholar

⁸ E.g., Anonymous Benedictine, Cronologia del Monastero di S. Procolo e della Religione benedettina cassinese in Bologna, excerpted in Brandileone, 11.Google Scholar

⁹ Trithemius, Johann, De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis (Paris 1493) fol. 85^r Google Scholar

¹⁰ Brechter, Suso, ‘Die Regula Benedicti im Decretum Gratiani,’ SG II (1954) 3.Google Scholar

¹¹ Odofredus, , Lectura super Digesto veteri (Lyons 1552), Book 12, De rebus creditis 1.1 ‘Bene est.’ Google Scholar

¹² For the meaning of stare as ‘to be in residence’ see the poem written between 1162 and 1166 by an anonymous teacher of grammar on the deeds of Frederick I, including his edict at Bologna Google Scholar

'ut nemo studium exercere volentes Google Scholar

impediat stantes nec euntes nec redeuntes.Google Scholar

ne pro vicino, qui nullo iure tenetur,Google Scholar

solvere cogatur quod non debere probatur' (vv. 494–99) Google Scholar

in Cencetti, Giorgio, ‘Studium Fuit Bononie,’ Studi Medievali 3rd Ser. 7 (1966) 818.Google Scholar

¹³ Bartolomeo, , Memorial Stone, quoted in Burselli, Girolamo, Chronica, RIS² XXIII 14.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Guglielmo, , De origine rerum, in Mittarelli III 323.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Burselli, , Chronica, RIS² XXIII 14.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Machiavelli, Alessandro, Annotationes in Sigonio, Carlo, Historiarum Bononiensium libri sex (Milan 1733) III 127–28; Mabillon, Jean, Annates ordinis D. Benedicti (Paris 1703–1759) VI 504.Google Scholar

¹⁷ To cite only standard reference works, omitting the innumerable authors who, relying on these works, identify Gratian as a Camaldolese monk of SS. Felice e Nabore, the following are representative: Kuttner, Stephan, ‘Gratian,’ Encyclopaedia Britannica (1963) X 658; Plöchl, Willibald M., Geschichte des Kirchenrechts (Vienna 1955) II 412; Rambaud-Buhot, , ‘Le legs’ 49; also Rambaud-Buhot, , ‘Gratian, Decretum of,’ New Catholic Encyclopedia (1969) VI 706; Stickler, Alfons, Historia iuris canonici latini (Turin 1950) 303; also Stickler, , ‘Gratian,’ LThK IV 1168; Torquebiau, P., ‘Corpus iuris canonici,’ Dictionnaire de droit canonique (1949) IV 611; Van Hove, Alphonse, Prologemena ad codicem iuris canonici ² (Malines—Rome 1945) sec. 343; Villien, A., ‘Gratien,’ Dictionnaire de droit canonique (1920) VI² 1728.Google Scholar

The most nearly accurate of modern accounts of Gratian, that of the Bolognese professor of law Forchielli, Giuseppe, ‘Graziano,’ Enciclopedia cattolica (1951) VI 1028, accepts without question Gratian's residence at Felice, S. Google Scholar

¹⁸ Mittarelli III 332–34.Google Scholar

¹⁹ Sarti I 332–33.Google Scholar

²⁰ Mittarelli III 307, and Appendix 437–38.Google Scholar

²¹ Ibid. III Appendix 363–64.Google Scholar

²² Savioli, Lodovico Vittorio, Annali bolognese (Bassano 1784) I¹ 262–63.Google Scholar

²³ Phillips, Georg, Kirchenrecht IV (Regensburg 1851) 153.Google Scholar

²⁴ von Schulte, Johann Friedrich, Die Geschichte der Quellen und Literatur des canonischen Rechtes I (Stuttgart 1875) 45–47.Google Scholar

²⁵ Naz, Raoul, ‘Van Hove,’ Dictionnaire de droit canonique VII (1965) 1432.Google Scholar

²⁶ Van Hove, , Prolegomena sec. 339.Google Scholar

²⁷ Besides the authors cited in n. 17, even Fliche, otherwise skeptical about Gratian's identity, accepts this claim: Fliche, Augustin, Histoire de l'église IX (Paris 1944) 83. A modern Camaldolese author rests his entire case for Gratian as an order member on the assumptions that Felice, S. was Camaldolese and that Gratian belonged to it: Grabbani, Anselmo, ‘De Gratiano Monacho Camaldulensi,’ Apollinaris 21 (1948) 8.Google Scholar

²⁸ Colonna, Giovanni, De viris illustribus, in Mittarelli, III 324.Google Scholar

²⁹ McLaughlin, Terrence, ‘Introduction,’ Summa parisiensis (Toronto 1952) xxxii; cf. Repertorium 177.Google Scholar

³⁰ Rufinus in his Summa (ed. Singer, H. [Paderborn 1902]) at C. 14 q. 1 declares, ‘Perfectio absoluta est utpote monachorum qui mundum penitus reliquerunt.’ Schulte took this glorification of monks to be ‘an unanswerable argument’ that Rufinus was a monk. He was too hasty, as Singer (introduction to Rufinus, LXX) shows. Paucapalea declares in his Summa at D.28 ‘summitatem capitis rudimus.’ Schulte noted that he was speaking of monastic tonsure and inferred that he himself must have been a monk: Schulte, I 110. Schulte ignored the fact that personification is a mode of speech in Paucapalea, as when at C. 33 q. 1 he imagines himself lusting for another's wife and then having the chance to marry her. This passage does not prove that Paucapalea was a layman, and the other does not prove he was a monk. With both Rufinus and Paucapalea, Schulte in good faith, but inaccurately, drew conclusions about monastic status from his understanding of the text before him. How can we exclude similar reasoning being engaged in by the man who wrote the Summa parisiensis? These examples of rash inferences about monkishness, made by a modern historian, suggest the possibility that the writer of the Summa parisiensis had not heard about Gratian's monkishness from anyone, but simply made an inference from his text. In both cases Gratian's position is very pro-monastic. In the first case, Gratian ‘enititur probare quod monachi possunt accusare’ — ‘he is struggling to prove that monks can be plaintiffs’; in the second ‘he wants’ (vult) certain possessions ‘conferri monasteriis in perpetuum.’ It is no aspersion on the honesty of the author of the Summa parisiensis to suggest that he may have made an unwarranted factual inference from this special pleading.Google Scholar

³¹ For the legislation against monks' developing forensic skills, see Council of Clermont (1130) c.5, Mansi, , XXI 438–39; Council of Reims (1131) c. 6, Mansi, XXI 459; Second Council of the Lateran, c. 9, Mansi, XXI 528. On Gratian's role in relation to litigators, see Stephanus, , Summa sit C. 13 pr.Google Scholar

³² Grandi, Guido, Vindiciae pro sua epistola de Pandectis (Pisa 1729) 10–11, coupled with Grandi, , Epistola de Pandectis ad Josephum Averanium (Florence 1723) 236.Google Scholar

³³ Mittarelli III 324.Google Scholar

³⁴ de Torigny, Robert, Chronicon (ed. Howlett, Richard; RS 82, 1889) IV 118. The date 1162 is inferred from his reference to Bishop Omnibonus, whose activity as a bishop is first documented in 1162: Kehr, VII 225. The passage may be owed to a reviser: Southern, R. W., ‘Master Vacarius and the Beginning of an English Academic Tradition,’ Medieval Learning and Literature (edd. Alexander, J. J. C. and Gibson, M. T.; Oxford 1976) 275.Google Scholar

³⁵ Anonymous, Gloss on MSS of Concordia discordantium canonum: Ghent, Bibl. Commun. et Univ. 55; Paris B.N. 3884; Trier 906; Mazarine 1289; Rouen 707; Montecassino 66; Pommersfelden 2744; London, Beatty 46, all as reported in Repertorium, 14.Google Scholar

³⁶ Anonymous, Chronicon Alberici monachi Trium Fontium a monacho Novi Monasterii Horensis interpolata, MGH-SS XXIII 574.Google Scholar

³⁷ Schaarschmidt, C., Johannes Saresberiensis (Leipzig 1862) 53; Reuter, Hermann, Geschichte Alexanders des Dritten (Berlin 1860–1864) III 443 and 791.Google Scholar

³⁸ Omrčmin, Ivo, Graziano e la Croazia (1958) as reported by Chodorow, Stanley, Christian Political Theory and Church Politics in Mid-Twelfth Century (Berkeley 1972) 49.Google Scholar

³⁹ He appears in the contemporary Chronica of Peter the Deacon (MGH-SS VII 882) as both an imperial judge and as an advocate for the monks of Monte Cassino threatened with excommunication for failing to swear allegiance to Innocent II. As to Walfredus' status as a layman, he is described by the canons of S. Vittore as ‘frater noster exterior’ (Sarti, I 34), and had a legitimate son (Chartularium studii Bononiensis XII 84).Google Scholar

⁴⁰ Boncompagnus, , Rhetorica novissima, ed. Gaudenzi, A., Scripta anecdota glossatorum (Bologna 1901) II 249.Google Scholar

⁴¹ Martin, , Chronicon, MGH-SS XXIV 469.Google Scholar

⁴² Colonna, Giovanni, De viris illustribus, excerpted in Mittarelli III 324.Google Scholar

⁴³ Anonymous, Chronicon ‘A’ of Bologna, RIS² XVIII 1.2, 12; Trithemius, , De scriptoribus ecclesiasticis fol. 85^r ; Mabillon, , Annales VI 504; Sarti, I 333.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Seckel, Emil, ‘Über neuere Editionen juristischer Schriften aus dem Mittelalter,’ ZSS-Rom. Abt. 21 (1900) 328–32.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ As to La Carrara in 1242, see Lazzari, Andrea, ‘Gratianus de Urbeveteri,’ SG 4 (1957) 7. But in a later medieval map only a ‘Carnaiola’ appears: Roberto Almagia, Map 24 in Documenti cartografici dello Stato Pontificio (Vatican City 1960). What existed in the 1100s is anyone's guess.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Anonymous, ‘Cronache delle manifestazioni,’ SG 5 (1958) 91.Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Summa parisiensis at D.18.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ Kuttner, Stephan, ‘Graziano, l'uomo e l'opera,’ SG 1 (1953) 20.Google Scholar

⁴⁹ Sarti, I 338.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ Rufinus, , Summa, ed. Singer, at C. 27 q. 2.Google Scholar

⁵¹ Du Cange, IV 336.Google Scholar

⁵² The dating depended on the assumption that Rufinus, criticizing Rolandus, was criticizing the man who became pope in 1159: see Rufinus, , Summa, ed. Singer, CXL. It has been shown that the Rolandus who became pope was distinct from the scholar Rufinus attacks: Noonan, John T. Jr., ‘Who Was Rolandus?’ in Law, Church and Society (edd. Pennington, Kenneth and Somerville, Robert; Philadelphia 1977) 21–48.Google Scholar

⁵³ Simone, , Summa, excerpted in Sarti II 284–85.Google Scholar

⁵⁴ John of Salisbury, Policraticus (ed. Webb, C. C. J.; Oxford 1919) II 69.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Anonymous, Flores temporum, MGH-SS XXIV 247; Brompton, John, Chronicon II 2388; Mabillon, , Annates VI 504.Google Scholar

⁵⁶ Sarti, , I 332. Sarti adds for good measure that Gratian was not Peter Comestor's brother, either; I have not come across any writer who said he was.Google Scholar

⁵⁷ Van Hove, A., ‘Gratian,’ The Catholic Encyclopedia VI 730.Google Scholar

⁵⁸ Van Hove, , Prologemena sec. 343.Google Scholar

⁵⁹ E.g. Stickler, , Historia 202; Plöchl, , Geschichte II 412.Google Scholar

⁶⁰ Vetulani, A., ‘Le décret de Gratien et les premiers décrétistes à la lumière d'une source nouvelle,’ SG 7 (1959) 337.Google Scholar

⁶¹ Stephanus of Rouen, Draco Normannicus (ed. Howlett, Richard; RS 83 [1885]) II 630. Stephanus' dating is noted by Chodorow, , Political Theory 47.Google Scholar

⁶² Teutonicus, Johannes, Glossa ordinaria on the Concordia at C. 2 q. 6 c. 31; Anonymous, Catalogus pontificum et imperatorum ex Casinensi, ut videtur, sumptus, MGH-SS XXII 361.Google Scholar

⁶³ E.g. Anonymous, Chronicon ‘A’ of Bologna, RIS² XVIII 1–2, 12; Burselli, , Chronica, RIS XXXII 14; Aldrovandi, Memorial Tablet at Petronio, S., Sarti, I 338; Sigonio, Carlo, De episcopis Bononiensibus (Milan 1733) III 417; Friedberg, x.Google Scholar

⁶⁴ Fournier, Paul, ‘Deux controverses sur les origines du Décret de Gratien,’ Revue d'histoire et de littérature religieuse 3 (1898) 253–86.Google Scholar

⁶⁵ See Mansi, , XXI 525–33 for the canons; for their use in Gratian, see Fransen, Gérard, ‘La date du décret de Gratien,’ Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique 51 (1956) 529.Google Scholar

⁶⁶ Brady, Ignatius, ‘Prolegomena’ to Lombard, Peter, Sententiae in IV Libros Distinctae (ed. Brady, I.; Grottaferrata 1977). At 121^*–29^* Brady fixes the date for Peter's Sentences as 1155–1158. In the Policraticus, completed in the summer of 1159, John of Salisbury uses the Concordia: Policraticus I xliii (references) and II 406 (date).Google Scholar

⁶⁷ MS Florence, Bibl. Naz., Conv. soppr. 6. IV (1736). On its relation to Paucapalea, see Noonan, John T. Jr., ‘The True Paucapalea?’ forthcoming in Fifth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Proceedings. Google Scholar

⁶⁸ Ed. von Schulte, J. F. as Paucapalea, , Summa über das Decretum Gratiani (Giessen 1880). On its relation to Paucapalea see the article cited in the previous note.Google Scholar

⁶⁹ Edited by Thaner, F. as Rolandus, , Stroma (Vienna 1874). On the two different men named Rolandus, see Noonan, John T. Jr., ‘Who Was Rolandus?’ (n. 52) 21–40.Google Scholar

⁷⁰ Excerpted in von Schulte, J. F., Dissertatio de Decreto ab Omnibono (Bonn 1892) passim. On the date, see Vetulani, A. and Uruszczak, W., ‘L’œuvre d'Omnibène dans le MS 602 de la Bibliothèque municipale de Cambrai,' Fourth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Proceedings (1976) 19.Google Scholar

⁷¹ Sicut uetus testamentum and Quoniam in omnibus carry Iustitie ratio, a decretal probably dated June 1146: Holtzmann, Walther, Kanonistische Ergänzungen zur Italia Pontificia (Tubingen 1959) 101. Omnibonus contains a decretal datable to June 1147: Vetulani, and Uruszczak, , ‘L’œuvre' 19.Google Scholar

⁷² Underlying this dating is the assumption that if the first three works had been written earlier they would have carried some reflection of Hadrian's policy on tithes. This assumption is not beyond challenge, because it took the decretists at least a decade to respond to Innocent II's decretal on marriage. It is also assumed that Cambrai MS 602 of Omnibonus, which refers to an ‘Arditio,’ refers to an Arditio who became cardinal in 1155: Vetulani, and Uruszczak, , ‘L’œuvre d'Omnibène,' 14.Google Scholar

⁷³ Fournier dated the book earlier because he thought that Lombard, Peter wrote in 1150 and that Anselm of Havelberg, writing about 1149–1150, had used the Concordia in his De ordine canonicorum regularium; PL 188.1094. With Brady's fixing of Peter Lombard's work at 1155–1159 and with the realization that the De ordine attributed to Anselm is actually Arno of Reichersberg's Scrutum canonicorum. (PL 194.1493; see LThK I 595 and 891), the basis for Fournier's conclusion disappears.Google Scholar

Another apparent use of Gratian in the 1140s has not stood up to criticism. A gloss on the Exceptiones Petri, MS Paris B.N. lat. 3876, refers to the ‘decretis Gratiani.’ The Exceptions Petri itself was dated as finished in 1144, and it was thought that the gloss could be contemporary: Patteta, Federico, ‘Per la storia del diritto romano nel medio evo,’ Rivista italiana per le scienze giuridiche 12 (1894) 13–15. But the gloss is in a different handwriting. Moreover, another gloss on the same MS refers to a decree of Hadrian IV (1155–1159). There is no way of showing whether the first gloss is contemporary with the second or is earlier. Finally, the Exceptiones Petri itself has recently been dated as done between 1158 and 1170: Poly, Jean-Pierre, ‘Les 1égistes provençaux et la diffusion du droit romain dans le Midi,’ Recueil de mémoires et travaux: Mélanges Roger Aubenas (1974) 630.Google Scholar

The earliest datable official use that Walther Holtzmann notes for the Concordia is a provincial synod in Norway. This synod he dates 1164, and he notes that it was attended by a ‘magister Stephanus’ from Orvieto, who could have known the Concordia. The suggestion that the book was brought by Nicholas Brakespear on his legation to Norway in 1152 he treats as unproved and doubtful: Holtzmann, W., ‘Die Benutzung Gratians in päpstlicher Kanzlei,’ SG 1 (1953) 347. In the same article Holtzmann finds no use of the Concordia by the Roman curia before the pontificate of Alexander III (1159–1181).Google Scholar

As recently as 1962, Foffano found traces of the Concordia in a Milanese collection of canons made in the 1140s; but a further detailed analysis has shown that what appeared to be from the Concordia comes in fact from other sources: Picasso, Giorgio, Collezioni canoniche milanesi del secolo XII (Milan 1969) 158–79.Google Scholar

It is possible that the first ‘outside’ use of the Concordia is its approval by Eugene III at Ferentino sometime between September 1150 and May 1151: Noonan, , ‘Was Gratian Approved at Ferentino?’ BMCL 6 (1977) 26–27.Google Scholar

⁷⁴ Respectively, Mansi, XXI 525–33 and Innocent II, Super eo quod, Compilatio prima 4.1.10, in Quinque compilationes antiquae (ed. Friedberg, E.; Graz 1882).Google Scholar

⁷⁵ Omnibonus, , Abbrevatio, in Schulte, , Dissertatio 14.Google Scholar

⁷⁶ Concordia, C. 2 q. 6 p.c. 31.Google Scholar

⁷⁷ Fournier, , ‘Deux controverses’ 265.Google Scholar

⁷⁸ On Henricus, Kehr, V 250; on Gualterius, Kehr, V 57 and 60; on Adelinus, , Gaudenzi, A., ‘L'età del Decreto di Graziano a l'antichissimo ms Cassinese di esso,’ Studi e memorie per la storia dell'Università di Bologna I (1909) 74.Google Scholar

⁷⁹ Huguccio, , Summa at C. 2 q. 6 p.c. 31: the date is ‘falsa littera.’ Google Scholar

⁸⁰ Gervase, , Acta pontificum Cantuariensis Ecclesiae (ed. Stubbs, W., RS 73) I 212–13. See the discussion of this passage as an interpolation in Southern, , ‘Master Vacarius’ 281.Google Scholar

⁸¹ Peitz, Wilhelm, ‘Gratian and Dionysius Exiguus,’ SG 1 (1953) 51.Google Scholar

⁸² Hermann Kantorowicz and Buckland, W. W., Studies in the Glossators of Roman Law (rev. Peter Weimar; Darmstadt 1969) 33.Google Scholar

⁸³ Kuttner, Stephan, ‘New Studies on the Roman Law in Gratian's Decretum,’ Seminar 11 (1953) 44.Google Scholar

⁸⁴ E.g., Alexander III to bishop Gerardus and the canons of the church of Bologna ‘et legis doctoribus ceterisque Bononiae commorantibus,’ JL 10587, Kehr V 251.Google Scholar

⁸⁵ John of Salisbury to Baldwin of Exeter, 1169, in Robertson, , Materials VII 3, discussed in Noonan, , ‘Was Gratian Approved?’ (n. 72) 21–26.Google Scholar

⁸⁶ Anonymous, Dialogus , in Thesaurus novus anecdotum (edd. Martène, E. and Durand, U.; Paris 1717) V 1641.Google Scholar

⁸⁷ See glosses cited at n. 35.Google Scholar

⁸⁸ Guizard, Louis, ‘Manuscrits du Decretum Gratiani conservés à l'Université de Paris,’ L'année canonique 2 (1953) 84.Google Scholar

⁸⁹ Rambaud-Buhot, Jacqueline, ‘L’étude des manuscrits du Décret de Gratien conservés en France,' SG 1 (1953) 130.Google Scholar

⁹⁰ Guizard, , ‘Manuscrits’ 91.Google Scholar

⁹¹ Rambaud-Buhot, , ‘L’étude' 131.Google Scholar

⁹² Rambaud-Buhot, , ‘Le legs’ 100–9.Google Scholar

⁹³ Vetulani, Adam, ‘Gratien et le droit romain,’ RHD 24–25 (1946–47) 11–48; Rambaud-Buhot, Jacqueline, ‘Le “corpus juris civilis” dans le Décret de Gratien,’ Bibliothèque de l'École des chartes 111 (1953) 54–64; Łitewski, Wieslaw, ‘Les textes procéduraux du droit de Justinien dans le Décret de Gratien,’ SG 9 (1956) 67.Google Scholar

⁹⁴ Kuttner, Stephan, ‘New Studies on the Roman Law,’ Seminar 11 (1953) 33.Google Scholar

⁹⁵ Ibid. 37.Google Scholar

⁹⁶ Ibid. 41.Google Scholar

⁹⁷ Ibid. 43.Google Scholar

⁹⁸ Ibid. 44.Google Scholar

⁹⁹ Ibid. 45–46.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁰ Concordia, D. 28 c. 2 and D. 90 c. 11.Google Scholar

¹⁰¹ Concordia, C. 18 q. 2 c. 25; C. 17 q. 4 c. 29; C. 21 q. 2 c. 5; and C. 23 q. 8 c. 32.Google Scholar

¹⁰² Concordia, C. 27 q. 1 c. 40.Google Scholar

¹⁰³ E. g., D. 94 c. 1 and D. 97 c. 3.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁴ E.g., C. 27 q. 1 c. 40 where the rubric is borrowed from c. 28 and is inaccurate for c. 40; and C. 27 q. 2 c. 50 where the rubric is contradicted by the dictum.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁵ Sicut uetus testamentum Florence, MS, B.N., conv. soppr. G IV (1736), fol. 1.Google Scholar

¹⁰⁶ Ibid. fol. 38^v .Google Scholar

¹⁰⁷ Ibid. fol. 19^r (C. 4 q. 2–3 c. 1) and C. 16 q. 5–6, c. 7 at fol. 26^v .Google Scholar

¹⁰⁸ Sicut uetus testamentum, fol. 22^rb; fol. 30^ra; fol. 42^rb; fol. 52^ra .Google Scholar

¹⁰⁹ Rolandus, , Summa, 113.Google Scholar

¹¹⁰ Ibid. 52 (C. 16 q. 5 c. 17).Google Scholar

¹¹¹ Ibid. 4.Google Scholar

¹¹² Ibid. 13.Google Scholar

¹¹³ Ibid. 113. Part III, D. 4 c. 2 of the Concordia itself also preserves this special name, tractatus de coniugio, for the book now incorporated in the whole.Google Scholar

¹¹⁴ Quoniam in omnibus, 3.Google Scholar

¹¹⁵ Ibid. 110.Google Scholar

¹¹⁶ Rambaud-Buhot, , ‘Le legs’ 81.Google Scholar

¹¹⁷ Weigand, Rudolf, ‘Die Glossen des Cardinalis (Magister Hubald?) zum Dekret Gratians, besonders zu C. 27 q. 2,’ BMCL 3 (1973) 75–81.Google Scholar

¹¹⁸ Rufinus, , Summa 5.Google Scholar

¹¹⁹ Ibid. 440.Google Scholar

¹²⁰ Stephanus, , Summa (ed. von Schulte, J. F.; Giessen 1891) 5.Google Scholar

¹²¹ Kuttner, Stephan, ‘The Third Part of Stephen of Tournai's Summa,’ Traditio 14 (1958) 502–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹²² Elegantius in iure divino (edd. Fransen, G. and Kuttner, S.; New York 1969) 1.Google Scholar

¹²³ Summa parisiensis, 1.Google Scholar

¹²⁴ McLaughlin, , ‘Introduction’ to the Summa parisiensis, XXVI.Google Scholar

¹²⁵ Ibid. XII.Google Scholar

¹²⁶ Ibid. 262 (C. 35 q. 2 and 3 c. 21).Google Scholar

¹²⁷ Ibid. 15 (D. 16 d.p.c. 5).Google Scholar

¹²⁸ Ibid. 100 (C. 1 q. 7 c. 27); 76 (D. 96 c. 13, 14).Google Scholar

¹²⁹ See Noonan, , ‘The True Paucapalea?’ (n. 67).Google Scholar

¹³⁰ Stephanus, to Gratian, Cardinal, in Les lettres d'Étienne de Tournai (ed. Desilve, J.; Valenciennes 1893) 57.Google Scholar

¹³¹ Weigand, , ‘Die Glossen des Cardinalis,’ 95.Google Scholar

¹³² Ibid. 94.Google Scholar

¹³³ Rolandus, , Summa, 4.Google Scholar

¹³⁴ Sicut uetus testamentum, fol. 44^v (C. 30 1 pr.) Google Scholar

¹³⁵ Fried, Johannes, Die Entstehung des Juristenstandes im 12. Jahrhundert (Cologne 1974) 11.Google Scholar

¹³⁶ Stephanus, , Summa, 238 (C. 27 q. 1 pr).Google Scholar

¹³⁷ Cardinalis, excerpted in Weigand, , ‘Die Glossen des Cardinalis,’ 85–92.Google Scholar

¹³⁸ Stickler, , Historia 202.Google Scholar

¹³⁹ Stephanus, , Summa, 217 (C. 13 pr).Google Scholar

¹⁴⁰ de Torigny, Robert, Chronicon 118.Google Scholar

¹⁴¹ Sicardus, , Summa, in Sarti, II 284–85.Google Scholar

¹⁴² Notarial Report of the Judgment of Goizo, Cardinal, Codice diplomatico padovano, ed. Gloria, Andrea, Monumenti storici publicati dalla R. deputazione veneta di storia patria 1^st ser., Documenti 4 (1879) 313.Google Scholar

¹⁴³ Kehr, , V 60.Google Scholar

¹⁴⁴ Kuttner, Stephan, ‘The Father of the Science of Canon Law,’ The Jurist 1 (1940) 2.Google Scholar