No CrossRef data available.
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.
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
The application of patristic biblical exegesis to medieval literature has produced some illuminating criticism in recent years. Unfortunately, the “allegorists” often fail to make use of one of the most important sources of traditional Christian thought and symbolism, the liturgy. Yet, medieval writers greatly enriched their work by drawing upon the liturgy as a source and inspiration, a fact demonstrated by a passage such as the Good Samaritan episode in Passus XVII of Piers Plowman.
1 All quotations from the poem are taken from The Vision of William Concerning Piers the Plowman, ed., Skeat, W. W. (Oxford 1886). Where passages from the A and C texts are used, they are clearly labelled A and C. Otherwise all references are to the B text.Google Scholar
2 In their exegesis of Genesis 18.1–2, the Fathers generally explained the appearance of the three men to Abraham at Mamre as a vision of the Trinity. The liturgy kept this tradition alive in the following response of the office of Quinquagesima: ‘Dum staret Abraham ad radicem Mambre: vidit tres pueros descendentes per viam. Tres vidit et unum adoravit. Cumque vidisset eos, cucurrit in occursum illorum adorans Dominum.’ See Proctor, F. and Wordsworth, C., edd., Breviarium ad usum insignis ecclesiae Sarum (Cambridge 1882) I dxlv. Note that Langland uses this response in the C text, Passus XIX 243.Google Scholar
3 In the modern Roman Missal this text is found in the Mass-formulary of the twelfth Sunday after Pentecost ( Missale Romanum, Editio prima post typicam [Romae 1962] 274), from which the above passage has been reprinted.Google Scholar
4 In the medieval English Church, the Samaritan Gospel was read on the thirteenth Sunday after the octave of Pentecost (Trinity Sunday): Legg, J. W., The Sarum Missal (Oxford 1916) 185; Henderson, W. G., ed., Missale ad usum insignis ecclesiae Eboracensis (Surtees Society 1872), I 235; Legg, J. W., ed., Missale ad usum ecclesiae Westmonasteriensis (London: HBS, 1891) I 425–427; Frere, W. H., ed., The Hereford Breviary (London: HBS, 1904–1913) I 469; Tolhurst, J. B. L., ed., The Monastic Breviary of Hyde Abbey, Winchester (London: HBS, 1930–1942) II fol. 160v .Google Scholar
5 Quaestiones Evangeliorum 2.19 (PL 35.1340); Bede, , In Lucae Evangelium Expositio 3.10 (PL 92.469AB; CCL 120.223.2238–2243). For an excellent discussion of Augustine's allegorical interpretation of the entire parable, see Sanchis, D., ‘Samaritanus Ille,’ Recherches de science religieuse 49 (1961) 406–425; a similar but earlier interpretation is found in Origen, Homilia 34 in Origène: Homélies sur S. Luc , edd. Crouzel, H., Fournier, F., and Périchon, P. (Sources chrétiennes 87 [Paris 1962]) and it is suggested by the editors (n. 402–403) that this interpretation may go perhaps as far back as apostolic times. I am indebted to Dom Anselm Strittmatter, O.S.B. for drawing my attention to these works.Google Scholar
6 PL 114.286–287.Google Scholar
7 Godefridus, , Homiliae dominicales (PL 174.571C–572A).Google Scholar
8 See note 4 above for service-book sources. The text is here transcribed from the Roman Missal (see n. 3 supra) 275, where it is found as the Epistle of the Mass-formulary for the thirteenth Sunday after Pentecost.Google Scholar
9 De divinis officiis 12.13 (PL 170.322AB); ed. Haacke, (CCL, Continuatio Mediaevalis 7 [Turnholti 1967] 406.351–361).Google Scholar
9a See n. 3 above.Google Scholar
10 See below for discussion of the Samaritan's veiled references to His Passion, defeat of Satan and Resurrection (Passus 17.109–123). See also Passus 18.10, where Will says of the Christ-Knight that he is ‘One semblable to the Samaritan.’ Google Scholar
11 Ambrose, , Expositio Evangelii secundum Lucam 7.74 (PL 15.1806C; CCL 14.239.759–761); Bede, , loc. cit. (n. 5 supra).Google Scholar
12 Durandus, William, Rationale divinorum officiorum (Neapoli 1859) 6.127 (639); Rupert, , op. cit. (n. 9 supra) 12.13 (PL 170.321); CCL 7.405.338–339. All the commentaries and homilists here quoted have this in one form or another.Google Scholar
13 Loc. cit. (n. 5 supra) 469CD; but Bede is here dependent upon Augustine, loc. cit. (ibid.); cf. Ambrose, op. cit. (n. 11 supra) PL 15.1806D–1807A; CCL 14.239.772–778.Google Scholar
14 Smaragdus (PL 102.447D–448), Rupertus (PL 170.322A) ed. Haacke, , (n. 9 supra) 406.345–347; Werner of St. Blaise († 1174), Deflorationes (PL 157A, 1120A); Sicardus of Cremona, Mitrale (PL 213.396A); Augustodunensis, Honorius, Speculum Ecclesiale (PL 172.1060CD).Google Scholar
15 See note 4 above for service book sources.Google Scholar
16 Since the bread referred to here is the manna of the desert as the biblical context of the passage shows, a more pertinent comment is made by Peter Lombard († 1164), who explains manna in terms of the Living Bread which descended from heaven: ‘Quid est manna? Panis vivus qui de caelo descendit’ (Collectanea in omnes D. Pauli Apostoli Epistolas. In Epistolam I ad Corinthios 10 [PL 191.1618C]).Google Scholar
17 Loc. cit. (n. 12 supra).Google Scholar
18 See Legg, , Sarum Missal 141.41; Henderson, , Missale … ecclesiae Eboracensis I.129.Google Scholar
19 See Proctor, and Wordsworth, , Breviarium Sarum, I dccci; Lawley, S. W., ed., Breviarium ad usum insignis ecclesiae Eboracensis (Surtees Society 1880–1882) I 402.Google Scholar
20 See note 4 above for service-book sources; as a conspicuous element of the Divine Office, the collect is recited not merely at Lauds and Vespers, but at Terce also and Sext and None.Google Scholar
21 Op. cit. (n. 12 supra) 638.Google Scholar
22 Mitrale, loc. cit. (n. 14 supra) 396AB.Google Scholar
23 See, for example, Augustine, , loc. cit. (n. 13 supra); Bede, , op. cit. (n. 5 supra) 468C; CCL 120.222-2211-2213.Google Scholar
24 Homiliae de tempore, PL 95.1388D. Cp. Godefridus, op. cit. (n. 7 surpa) 566B.Google Scholar
25 Op. cit. (n. 14 supra) PL 172.1059C.Google Scholar
26 Op. cit. (n. 13 supra) PL 15.1806A; CCL 14.238.742–745. See also Augustine, , loc. cit. (n. 13 supra); Bede, , op. cit. (n. 13 supra) 468D.Google Scholar
27 Collectiones PL 102.447A; Paul the Deacon, op. cit. (n. 24 supra) PL 95.1381D.Google Scholar
28 Op. cit. (n. 14 supra) 1059C.Google Scholar
29 Loc. cit. (n. 12 supra); similar statements are made by Sicardus, , loc. cit. (n. 14 supra) and Rupert of Deutz, op. cit. (n. 9 supra) 322BC; ed. Haacke, 406.361–368.Google Scholar
30 Homiliae de tempore, PL 95.1392A.Google Scholar
31 PL 102.448A.Google Scholar
32 See page 222 above where this chant is quoted.Google Scholar
33 Op. cit. (n. 9 supra) 322CD; ed. Haacke, 406.383–385.Google Scholar
34 Homilia II in psalmum xxxvii, PG 12.1386AB.Google Scholar
35 Commentarius in Ecclesiasten, 10 (PL 23.1096B). The same image occurs in the Syrian Church; see Aphraat, , Demonstratio VII De Paenitentibus, nos. 2 and 3 in Graffin, R., ed., Patrologia Syriaca (Paris, 1894–1936) I.315–316.Google Scholar
36 Doble, G. H., ed., Pontificale Lanaletense (London: Henry Bradshaw Society 1937) 140; Wilson, H. A., ed., The Benedictional of Archbishop Robert (London: Henry Bradshaw Society, 1903), 57.Google Scholar
37 Werner of St. Blaise, Deflorationes, PL 157.1120B; see also Smaragdus, , loc. cit. (n. 14 supra) 448A.Google Scholar
38 Rationale 6.127(638).Google Scholar
39 The answers Will receives are too often taken as contradictory, when in fact they are complementary; Langland simply balances off against each other as many facets of the solution as possible, thereby revealing the complex nature of both it and the problem it seeks to clear up. Also, each answer is that aspect of the solution which one would naturally expect from the allegorized faculty, virtue, or abstraction presenting it. For example, the faculty for speculative thinking, represented by the character Thought, sees Dowel as the life of all honest toilers in the secular state, Dobet as the life of the cloister, and Dobest as the life of the bishop. Thought, according to his nature, speaks in abstractions and completely ignores individualizing circumstances. Therefore, he fails to see that these ideals, though good in themselves, do not necessarily lead to a perfect life simply because a man embraces one of them, and that they may even be debased and corrupted by individuals. However, the nature of the speaker calls for just such a one-sided solution. Divorced from all the other faculties which influence him, Thought necessarily produces an incomplete answer but one needed to solve the puzzle.Google Scholar
40 The belief that Christ practiced perfectly all that He taught so that man might have a model after which he could fashion his own life, is alluded to in Passus XI 227–234: Google Scholar
Cleophas ne knewe hym nauzte. that he Cryste were,
For his pore paraille. and pylgrymes wedes,
Tyl he blessed and brak. the bred that thei eten.
So bi his werkes thei wisten. that he was Iesus;
Ac by clothyng thei knewe hym nouzte, ne bi carpynge of tonge.
And al was im ensample. to vs synful here,
That we shulde be low. and ḷloueliche of speche,
And apparaille vs nouzte ouer proudly. for pylgrymes ar we alle.