^{page 183 note 1} I wish to acknowledge Professor Wenzel's advice during the early stages of this study. Funds for my first research were provided through a fellowship from the National Endowment for the Humanities.Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 2} Wenzel, S., ‘The Seven Deadly Sins: Some Problems of Research,’ Speculum 43 (1968) 8.Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 3} See, for example, the anonymous De septem septennis (PL 199.945–64). On the sevenfold classification of man's powers of body and soul in the twelfth century, see the remarks of B. McGinn, Three Treatises on Man: A Cistercian Anthropology (Kalamazoo 1977) 19–20.Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 4} Wenzel, S., ‘Robert Grosseteste's Treatise on Confession ‘“Deus Est”,’ Franciscan Studies 30 (1970) 218–93, esp. 239–42, 249. Grosseteste was accustomed to treat technical philosophic matters in pastoral works. He did so notably in a sermon or ‘conference,’ ed. by J. McEvoy, ‘Robert Grosseteste's Theory of Human Nature with the Text of his Conference “Ecclesia Sancta Celebrat”,’ RThAM 47 (1980) 131–87. The setting of this work is suggestively the same as Bonaventure's Collationes, the primary text of this paper.Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 5} Wenzel, ‘The Seven Deadly Sins’ 10.Google Scholar

^{page 183 note 6} Bougerol, J.-G., ‘Saint Bonaventure et le pseudo-Denys l'areopagite,’ Études franciscaines suppl. ann. (1968) 33–123; ‘Saint Bonaventure et la hiérarchie dionysienne,’ AHDLMA 36 (1969) 131–67; ‘Saint Bonaventure et Saint Anselme,’ Antonianum 47 (1972) 333–61; G. Zinn, ‘Book and Word: The Victorine Background of Bonaventure's Use of Symbols,’ in: S. Bonaventura, 1274–1974 (Grottaferrata 1973) II 143–69.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 7} Gieben, S., ‘Traces of God in Nature According to Robert Grosseteste,’ Franciscan Studies 24 (1964) 144–58; ‘The Pseudo-Bonaventurian Work “Symbolica Theologia”,’ in: Miscellanea Melchior de Pobladura (Rome 1964) I 173–95; C. Bérubé and S. Gieben, ‘Guibert de Tournai et Robert Grosseteste: Sources inconnues de Saint Bonaventure, suivi de l’édition critique de trois chapitres du Rudimentum Doctrinae de Guibert de Tournai,’ in: S. Bonaventura, 1274–1974 II 627–54; D. Unger, ‘Robert Grosseteste, Bishop of Lincoln, 1235–1253, on the Reasons for the Incarnation,’ Franciscan Studies 16 (1956) 1–36. See also R. C. Dales, ‘A Medieval View of Human Dignity,’ Journal of the History of Ideas 38 (1977) 457–72 (a study of the Christian tradition of man as minor mundus culminating in Grosseteste).Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 8} Itinerarium mentis in Deum V 8 (S. Bonaventurae Opera omnia, cura PP. Collegii S. Bonaventurae; 10 vols [Quaracchi 1882–1902] V 310). The editors, n. 3, cite Alan of Lille as Bonaventure's immediate source for this traditional maxim.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 9} Synan, E. A., ‘Cardinal Virtues in the Cosmos of Saint Bonaventure,’ in S. Bonaventura, 1274–1974 III 21–38.Google Scholar

^{page 184 note 10} Bougerol, J.-G., Introduction to the Works of Bonaventure (trans. José de Vinck; Paterson, N.J. 1964). See the chronology, pp. 171–77.Google Scholar

^{page 185 note 11} Synan 26; Bougerol, Introduction 136.Google Scholar

^{page 185 note 12} Collationes in Hexaëmeron sive illuminationes ecclesiae XIX 14 (Opera V 422). We shall cite this edition as In Hex. (Opera V). See Synan, 26–27.Google Scholar

^{page 185 note 13} Ratzinger, J., The Theology of History in St. Bonaventure (trans. Z. Hayes; Chicago 1971) chapter 1, pp. 104ff., 117ff.Google Scholar

^{page 185 note 14} Bougerol, Introduction 132.Google Scholar

^{page 185 note 15} Bougerol, Introduction 125.Google Scholar

^{page 185 note 16} See note 12; Bougerol, Introduction 131.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 17} S. Bonaventurae Collationes in Hexaëmeron et Bonaventuriana quaedam selecta (ed. F. M. Delorme; Quaracchi 1934). We shall cite this edition as In Hex. (ed. Delorme).Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 18} In Hex. (ed. Delorme 274–75); In Hex. (Opera V Additamentum 449–50). Cf. Bougerol, Introduction 126.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 19} Since both texts have authority, which one a commentator prefers will depend upon his understanding of the work. I do not find the two texts significantly different conceptually. Generally, I shall cite the Opera omnia text. When its expression seems more apt, or amplifies in an interesting way a point common to both texts, I shall cite the redaction edited by Delorme.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 20} Synan 24–27.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 21} Synan 26.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 22} Bougerol, Introduction 133.Google Scholar

^{page 186 note 23} In Hex. III 24 (Opera V 347); In Hex. Princ. Coll. I 9 (ed. Delorme 4). Cf. Synan (26 n. 17) who adduces these texts.Google Scholar

^{page 187 note 24} Chenu, M.-D., Toward Understanding St. Thomas (trans. A. M. Landry and D. Hughes; Chicago 1964) 79–99, 157–58.Google Scholar

^{page 187 note 25} Robbins, F. E., The Hexaemeral Literature: A Study of the Greek and Latin Commentaries (Chicago 1912). On the difference between exegetical and scholastic treatment of the six days, see the remarks of Nicholas H. Steneck, Science and Creation in the Middle Ages: Henry of Langenstein (d.1397) on Genesis (Notre Dame 1976) 20–21.Google Scholar

^{page 187 note 26} Bougerol, Introduction 123.Google Scholar

^{page 187 note 27} Augustine, De doctrina christiana II 10–15, 30–31, III 83–86 (ed. G. M. Green, CSEL 80.36–37, 41–42, 101–102). For the direct influence of Augustine's De doctrina upon Bonaventure's exegesis, see, for example, Breviloquium Prol. 6 (Opera V 208–208).Google Scholar

^{page 187 note 28} On the role of the ‘seminal reasons’ in Bonaventure's thought, see the lucid account in E. Gilson, The Philosophy of St. Bonaventure (trans. I. Trethowan and F. J. Sheed; Paterson, N.J. 1965) 265–83. I hope that the significance of these analogies will become clear in the course of my study.Google Scholar

^{page 188 note 29} In Hex. XIX: title ‘De tertia visione tractatio septima et ultima, quae agit de recta via et ratione, qua fructus Scripturae percipiantur, sive qua per scientiam et sanctitatem ad sapientiam perveniatur’ (Opera V 419–24).Google Scholar

^{page 188 note 30} In II Sent. d.12 a.1 q.2 (Opera II 295–98).Google Scholar

^{page 188 note 31} Cf. Peter Lombard, II Sent. d.12 (Bonaventurae Opera II 290).Google Scholar

^{page 190 note 32} ‘Of two possible conclusions, of which one attributes more to nature or free-will and less to God, while the other more to God at the expense of nature, he will always choose the second …’ (Gilson 432).Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 33} De reductione artium ad theologiam 12 (Opera V 322–23).Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 34} Breviloquium Prol. 1–3 and 5 (Opera V 203–207).Google Scholar

^{page 191 note 35} De reductione artium 4 and 17 (Opera V 321, 323–24). As we shall see, Bonaventure, In II Sent. d.12 a.1 q.2, will amplify his argument by the fourfold reasoning of the spiritual senses, as he does throughout his works. H. Caplan, ‘The Four Senses of Scriptural Interpretation and the Medieval Theory of Preaching,’ Speculum 4 (1929) 282–90, shows that the four senses served as a means both of rhetorical topical invention, and of dilatatio and adornment. See the Ars concionandi attributed to Bonaventure, cap. 34 (Opera IX 17). In composing the world in a persuasive way, God would seem to have amplified and adorned the machina mundana by bestowing a fourfold significance upon all of its elements. On Bonaventure's subordination of dialectic to rhetoric, see R. McKeon, ‘Rhetoric in the Middle Ages,’ Speculum 17 (1942) 23–25.Google Scholar

^{page 192 note 36} See Breviloquium Prol. 3: ‘… philosophia quidem agit de rebus, ut sunt in natura, seu in anima secundum notitiam naturaliter insitam, vel etiam acquisitam; sed theologia, tanquam scientia supra fidem fundata et per Spiritum sanctum revelata, agit et de eis quae spectant ad gratiam et gloriam et etiam ad Sapientiam aeternum … assumens de naturis rerum, quantum sibi opus est ad fabricandum speculum, per quod fiat repraesentatio divinorum’ (Opera V 205). See also Prol. 4: ‘Quoniam autem Deus non tantum loquitur per verba, verum etiam per facta, quia ipsius dicere facere est, et ipsius facere dicere; et omnia creata tanquam Dei effectus innuunt suam causam; ideo in Scriptura divinitus tradita non tantum debent significare verba, verum etiam facta’ (Opera V 206). See the Appendix to this study for further comment on words and things.Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 37} In II Sent. d. 3 q. 2 a. 1 qq. 1&2 (Opera II 112–17).Google Scholar

^{page 193 note 38} This motif (see n. 122 below) seems to have Eucharistic overtones. In terms of Bonaventure's exegesis, the ‘bread’ and ‘wine’ of the letter are transformed into the ‘body’ and ‘blood’ of Christ in the allegorical sense, since the ‘Opera reparationis [toward which the sense of allegory always points] cum sint multa, omnia ad Christi oblationem principalem habent aspectum’ (Breviloquium Prol. 4 [Opera V 205]). The philosophers would seem then to ‘desacramentalize’ the letter, and thereby degrade the substance of bread into stones, wine into water. For the medieval theme of the ‘two tables,’ Scripture and the Eucharist, see J. Leclercq, F. Vandenbroucke, and L. Bouyer, The Spirituality of the Middle Ages (trans. the Benedictines of Holme Eden Abbey; London 1968) 303.Google Scholar

^{page 194 note 39} In II Sent. d. 12 a. 1 q. 2 concl. (Opera II 296).Google Scholar

^{page 194 note 40} In II Sent. d. 12 a. 1 q. 2 concl. (Opera II 297).Google Scholar

^{page 194 note 41} For example, Itinerarium Prol. 1 (Opera V 295); Breviloquium Prol. (Opera V 201); De reductione artium 1 (Opera V 319 et passim); In Hex. II 1 (Opera V 336).Google Scholar

^{page 195 note 42} Fish, S. E., Self-Consuming Artifacts: The Experience of Seventeenth-Century Literature (Berkeley 1972) esp. 21–43 for an analysis of Augustine on signs and things.Google Scholar

^{page 195 note 43} Might this allude to Romans 8.22–23 ? ‘Scimus enim quod omnis creatura ingemiscit et parturit usque adhuc; non solum autem illa, sed et nos ipsi primitias Spiritus habentes, et ipsi intra nos geminus adoptionem filiorum Dei expectantes, redemptionem corporis nostri.’Google Scholar

^{page 195 note 44} In II Sent. d. 12 a. 1 q. 2 concl. (Opera II 297).Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 45} In II Sent. d. 15 a. 2 q. 1 concl. (383).Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 46} In II Sent. d. 12 a. 1 q. 2 concl. (297).Google Scholar

^{page 196 note 47} In II Sent. d. 12 a. 1 q. 2 concl. (297). The editors cite Confessiones 12.18–32.Google Scholar

^{page 197 note 48} In II Sent. d. 12 a. 1 q. 2 sol. opp. 4, 5, 6 (298). Might these three orders correspond to the rhetorical inventio (the discovery of res), dispositio (see Appendix), and elocutio (where traditionally the figures of ornatus are treated) ?Google Scholar

^{page 197 note 49} See, for example, Itinerarium I 14 (Opera V 299); Breviloquium II 1 and 2 (Opera V 219, 220). The idea pervades the Collationes.Google Scholar

^{page 197 note 50} Itinerarium V–VI (Opera V 308–12). God's nature is best expressed in his desire to communicate (communicare). He is the summa communicabilitas, the summa communicatio et vera diffusio (Itinerarium VI 3 [Opera V 311]). The latter phrase indicates the analogy between light and the divine goodness.Google Scholar

^{page 197 note 51} In II Sent. d. 12 a. 1 q. 2 sol. opp. 4, 5, 6 (Opera II 298). Throughout this question, Bonaventure draws terms from rhetorical tradition. Rudis usually signifies uncultivated or formless speech. See Cicero, , Brutus 85.294 (ed. Wilkins); De oratore 1.2.5 (ed. Wilkins); Quintilian, Institutio oratoria 3.1.5; 9.4.17–18 (ed. M. Winterbottom [Oxford 1970] 130, 538). The term ineptus is closely related to rudis. It refers to one whose speech is tactless and inappropriate. See Cicero, De oratore 2.4.17–18 and Orator 67.226 (ed. Wilkins). Bonaventure's use of the term suggests that the manner of God's creation is inappropriate considered in relation to his power, but not inappropriate considered in relation to the audience. Throughout the rhetorical tradition, eruditio signifies the comprehensive knowledge of words and things necessary for one who would unite wisdom and eloquence, and one who possesses such encyclopaedic knowledge is eruditus. See Cicero, , De oratore 1.22.102–103; Brutus 67.236; De officiis 1.33 (Loeb 120–21); Quintilian, Inst. orat. 1.4.6; 6.3.17 (ed. cit. 23, 339) (opposite to rusticitas). God's creative work conducts ignorant listeners (rudes) to knowledge (eruditio). For the rough eloquence of Scripture, which however instructs (erudire) to beatitude, see Augustine, De doctrina IV 27–28 (CSEL 80.124). The term eruditio, in its fullest significance, occurs in the title of Hugh of St. Victor's work, Eruditio Didascalia. On the influence of Hugh's Didascalicon upon Bonaventure's concept of wisdom, see Bougerol, Introduction 38, and Roger Baron, ‘L’ Influence d'Hugues de Saint-Victor,’ RThAM 22 (1955) 56–71. Encyclopaedic erudition in the Middle Ages centered on the work of six days; see R. Collison, Encyclopaedias: Their History Throughout the Ages (New York 1964) 44–81. The word thesaurus is commonly used by rhetoricians to signify the abundance of words, things, and topics stored in the eloquent orator's memory. See Cicero, , De oratore 1.5.18, and Quintilian, Inst. orat. 11.2.1–2 (ed. cit. 642). Bonaventure here quotes the term in a scriptural text, but Christian rhetoricians habitually accommodated this text to an analogy with abundance in rhetorical invention. See the introduction to my translation of Benet of Canfield, The Rule of Perfection (forthcoming). Bonaventure's term, collocare (fund. 3), also has strong rhetorical overtones. God's exact arrangement of created signs over a sequence of six days is similar to the rhetorician's collocatio verborum, wherein if a precise order of words is changed, a certain symmetry is lost, even though the sententia remains the same. See Cicero, , Orator 24.80–81. Bonaventure several times states that God could have created the world in any manner (the fact remains), but that he ordered his effects carefully over six days in view of sixfold concordances. Cicero says that the collocatio verborum is one of the primary species of ornatus. Finally, in De reductione artium 16 (Opera V 323), Bonaventure explains God's ultimate ‘condescension’ to man by analogy to speech. As a speaker clothes the concept of his mind (verbum mentis) in material sound (vox) in order to communicate it to another, so the eternal Word became flesh, so that he might be known by men endowed with senses. In becoming flesh the Word does not depart from the bosom of the Father, any more than a concept when uttered in speech leaves the mind. See Augustine, , De doctrina I 26 (CSEL 80. 14–15).Google Scholar

^{page 198 note 52} In II Sent d. 12 a. 1 q. 3 concl.; d. 13 div. text.; d. 14 p. 1 div. text.; d. 15 a. 1 q. 1 concl.; d. 15 a. 1 q. 2; d. 17 a. 2 q. 2; d. 18 a. 1 q. 3 (Opera II 300, 310, 335, 374, 377–78, 414–26, 442).Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 53} In II Sent. d. 2 p. 2 a. 2 q. 1 sol. opp. 1, 2 (light of empyrean influences all below); d. 13 div. text. (light the form of prime matter); d. 13 a. 1 q. 1 sol. opp. 4; d. 13 a. 2 q. 2 fund. 4 (light educes the forms of animal and vegetable souls); d. 13 a. 3 q. 2 concl. (light educes the act of the senses, presides over generation of minerals) (Opera II 75, 310, 313, 319, 328); Breviloquium II 4 (Opera V 221).Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 54} In III Sent. d. 27 a. 1 q. 3 sol. opp. 1 (Opera III 598).Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 55} Cur Deus homo I 3–4 (S. Anselmi Opera omnia [ed. F. S. Schmitt; Edinburgh 1946] II 51 lines 3–18).Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 56} In Hex. I 17 (Opera V 332).Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 57} Schaefer, A., ‘The Position and Function of Man in the Created World According to St. Bonaventure,’ Franciscan Studies 20 (1960) 262–70.Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 58} In Hex. III 2 (Opera V 343).Google Scholar

^{page 199 note 59} Sermo IV 17 (Opera V 572).Google Scholar

^{page 200 note 60} In Hex. III 8–9 (Opera V 344–45).Google Scholar

^{page 200 note 61} Gregory the Great, Hom. in Ezech. 3 (PL 76.808–809).Google Scholar

^{page 200 note 62} In Hex. VI 7 (Opera V 362–63).Google Scholar

^{page 200 note 63} Greenhill, E. S., Die geistigen Voraussetzungen der Bilderreiche des Speculum virginum: Versuch einer Deutung (BGPhMA 39, 2; Münster 1962); R. E. McNally, ‘The Evangelists in the Hiberno-Latin Tradition,’ in Festschrift Bernhard Bischoff (Stuttgart 1971) 111–22.Google Scholar

^{page 200 note 64} Glaber, Radolphus, Historiae sui temporis (PL 142.613–14).Google Scholar

^{page 200 note 65} Lottin, O., Psychologie et morale aux XII^e et XIII^e siècles III 1 (Gembloux 1949) 175–76.Google Scholar

^{page 201 note 66} Lottin, op. cit. 180–83.Google Scholar

^{page 201 note 67} ‘Hae sunt tantae nobilitas, quod dispositio mundi his correspondet,’ In Hex . VI 20 (Opera V 363). Synan (32 n. 39) remarks that the other redaction states the reverse: ‘Sunt iterum hae virtutes tantae veritatis et ordinis, ut mundi dispositionibus correspondeant,’ In Hex. Vis. 1 Coll. III 20 (ed. Delorme 96).Google Scholar

^{page 201 note 68} Breviloquium II 5, 12 (Opera V 222–24, 229–30). See Hugh of St. Victor, De sacramentis christianae fidei I pt. 6 5–6; pt. 10 2 (PL 176.266–68, 327–31).Google Scholar

^{page 201 note 69} Grosseteste, De luce seu inchoatione formarum (ed. L. Baur, Die philosophischen Werke des Robert Grosseteste [BGPhMA 9; Münster 1912] esp. 51–52). For the influence of Grosssteste on Bonaventure's theory of light, see Gilson 251–59.Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 70} In II Sent d. 2 p. 2 a. 1 q. 1 fund. 4 concl.; d. 13 div. text.; d. 13 a. 2 q. 1 fund. 6 concl. sol. opp. 5, 6 (Opera II 310, 73–74, 310, 317–22); Breviloquium II 3 (Opera V 220–21).Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 71} In II Sent. d. 13 a. 1 q. 1 concl. (Opera II 312–13).Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 72} In II Sent. d. 13 div. text.; d. 13 a. 2 q. 1 (Opera II 310, 317–18).Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 73} In II Sent. d. 12 a. 1 q. 3 concl.; d. 12 a. 2 q. 1 org. pro aff. 1–4; d. 13 div. text. (Opera II 300–302, 310).Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 74} In II Sent. d. 2 p. 2 q. 2 fund. 4 concl.; d. 13 a. 2 q. 1 fund. 6 concl. sol. opp. 5–6 (Opera II 73–74, 319–22).Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 75} See notes 52 and 53.Google Scholar

^{page 202 note 76} Grosseteste, De intelligentiis (ed. Baur 116).Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 77} In II Sent. d. 17 a. 2 q. 2 concl.; d. 17 a. 2 q. 3 (Opera II 422–23, 425); Breviloquium II 4 (Opera V 226).Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 78} Breviloquium II 3 (Opera V 220–21).Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 79} In II Sent. d. 13 a. 1 q. 1 ad opp. 3 sol. opp. 3 (Opera II 310, 313).Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 80} In II Sent. d. 13 a. 1 q. 1 sol. opp. 3 (313).Google Scholar

^{page 203 note 81} The most faithful account of Bonaventure's teaching on this point is C. Bérubé, De la philosophie à la sagesse chez Saint Bonaventure et Roger Bacon (Rome 1976).Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 82} Itinerarium II 2 (Opera V 300) and De reductione artium 3 (Opera V 320). See the fine article by J. McEvoy, ‘Microcosm and Macrocosm in the Writings of St. Bonaventure,’ in S. Bonaventura, 1274–1974 II 309–43.Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 83} Itinerarium II 9 (Opera V 301–302).Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 84} Itinerarium II 9 (302).Google Scholar

^{page 204 note 85} Itinerarium II 9 (302).Google Scholar

^{page 205 note 86} Quaestiones disputatae de scientia Christi IV 22–23 (Opera V 572).Google Scholar

^{page 205 note 87} In Hex. III 8–9 (Opera V 344–45).Google Scholar

^{page 205 note 88} Grosseteste, De veritate (ed. Baur 137–38). See Bérubé and Gieben, art. cit. ‘Guibert de Tournai’ (supra n. 7).Google Scholar

^{page 205 note 89} Itinerarium V 5 (Opera V 309).Google Scholar

^{page 205 note 90} Itinerarium VII 5 (Opera V 313). Bonaventure quotes Dionysius on this point.Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 91} Breviloquium II 11 (Opera V 229).Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 92} In Hex. VI 2–5 (Opera V 360–61).Google Scholar

^{page 206 note 93} In Hex. VI 4 (Opera V 361).Google Scholar

^{page 207 note 94} In Hex. VI 6 (Opera V 361).Google Scholar

^{page 207 note 95} In Hex. VI 7 (Opera V 361–62).Google Scholar

^{page 207 note 96} In Hex. VI 10 (Opera V 362).Google Scholar

^{page 207 note 97} In II Sent. d. 7 p. 2 a. 2 q. 1 concl. (Opera II 197–99); d. 7 p. 2 a. 2 q. 2 concl. (201–202).Google Scholar

^{page 207 note 98} Macrobius, Commentary on the Dream of Scipio I 8 (trans. W. H. Stahl [New York 1952] 120–29). For the influence of Macrobius’ scheme in the Middle Ages, see R. Tuve, ‘Notes on the Virtues and Vices: Pt. 1, Two Fifteenth-Century Lines of Dependence on the Thirteenth and Twelfth Centuries,’ Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 26 (1963) 264–303. See also Ps.-Vincent of Beauvais, Speculum morale I d. 7 p. 3 ad 4 (Speculum maius [Douai 1624; repr. Graz 1964] III 187).Google Scholar

^{page 208 note 99} In Hex. VI 26–32 (Opera V 364).Google Scholar

^{page 208 note 100} In Hex. VI 24 (Opera V 363).Google Scholar

^{page 208 note 101} Macrobius, Commentary I 12 (tr. Stahl 133–37).Google Scholar

^{page 208 note 102} In Hex. VII 5 (Opera V 366).Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 103} In Hex. Vis. 1 Coll. IV 12 (ed. Delorme 103). On the Great Year, see P. Duhem, Le Système du monde I (Paris 1913) 65–75 passim.Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 104} In Hex. VII 12 (Opera V 367).Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 105} In III Sent. d. 33 art. unicus q. 4 (Opera III 719–21). Lottin, op. cit. (supra n. 65) 158–59.Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 106} In Hex. VII 8 (Opera V 366–67). For ‘false opinions’ concerning the relation between soul and body, for want of the revealed doctrine of the resurrection of the body, see Augustine, De doctrina I 48–53 (CSEL 80.20–22).Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 107} In Hex. VII 9–11 (Opera V 367).Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 108} In Hex. VII 7 (Opera V 366).Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 109} Pouchet, R., La Rectitudo chez saint Anselme: Un itinéraire augustinien de l'ǎme à Dieu (Paris 1964) 252–58 for Grosseteste and Bonaventure.Google Scholar

^{page 209 note 110} Grosseteste, De veritate (ed. Baur 135); J.-G. Bougeril, Lexique de saint Bonaventure (Paris 1969) 113.Google Scholar

^{page 210 note 111} Mulligan, R. W., ‘Portio superior and Portio inferior rationis in the Writings of St. Bonaventure,’ Franciscan Studies 15 (1955) 332–49.Google Scholar

^{page 210 note 112} Breviloquium V 4 (Opera V 256–57).Google Scholar

^{page 210 note 113} Breviloquium V 4 (Opera V 256).Google Scholar

^{page 210 note 114} In II Sent. d. 13 a. 2 q. 2 (Opera II 319–20).Google Scholar

^{page 210 note 115} Breviloquium V 3 (Opera V 257). In III Sent. d. 23 a. 2 a. 5 concl. (Opera III 498), Bonaventure develops the analogies among the eduction of forms from matter, light's reduction of color from potency to act, and grace's infusion of the virtues.Google Scholar

^{page 211 note 116} In Hex. VII 15, 17 (Opera V 367–68). ‘To clothe’ (vestire) speech with colors is synonymous with adorning (ornare) it. See Cicero, , De oratore 1.31.142; Quintilian, Inst. orat. 8. praef. 20 (ed. cit. 422).Google Scholar

^{page 211 note 117} In Hex. VI 14–19 (Opera V 362–63). Cicero, De Inventione 2.53–54 (Loeb ed. 326–33). For the influence of Cicero's doctrine of the virtues in the Middle Ages, see P. Delhaye, ‘Une adaptation du “De Officiis” au XII^e siècle,’ RThAM 15 (1949) 227–58; id., ‘L'enseignement morale au XII^e siècle,’ Mediaeval Studies 11 (1949) 77–99.Google Scholar

^{page 211 note 118} In Hex. Vis. 1 coll. IV 15 (ed. Delorme 105).Google Scholar

^{page 211 note 119} Philo, Legum allegoria 1.19–27 (Loeb ed. 187–205); Ambrose, Liber de paradiso 3 (PL 14.296–300); Augustine, De Genesi contra Manichaeos 1.9–10 (PL 34.202–204); Honorius of Autun, Expositio in Cantica Canticorum vers. 13–14 (PL 172.420–30). See also Speculum virginum (ed. Greenhill 52–58 and the ample notes).Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 120} Augustine, De Genesi contra Manichaeos 1.10 (PL 34.204).Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 121} In Hex. VII 18 (Opera V 368). Gregory the Great, Moralia in Job 29.72 (PL 76.517.)Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 122} In Hex. VII 20 (Opera V 368). See note 38 above.Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 123} In Hex. VII 21 (Opera V 368).Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 124} Quaestiones disputatae de mysterio Trinitatis q. 8 ad 7 (Opera V 115).Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 125} In III Sent. d. 1 a. 2 q. 1 concl. (Opera III 20).Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 126} In Hex. I 22–24 (Opera V 333).Google Scholar

^{page 212 note 127} In Hex. V 33 (Opera V 359).Google Scholar

^{page 213 note 128} See these opinions in Gilson (286, 432 et passim). Expressed so eloquently, they have become scholarly commonplaces.Google Scholar

^{page 213 note 129} Ars concionandi 44 (Opera IX 19). On the question of authorship, see the summary in H. C. H. Hazel, ‘The Bonaventurian “Ars concionandi”,’ in S. Bonaventura, 1274–1974 II 435–46. Hazel thinks Bonaventure's authorship probable and cites McKeon's acceptance. On the Jews in In Hex., see Synan 29–31.Google Scholar

^{page 213 note 130} Petry, R. C., ‘ Verbum Abbreviatum: St. Bonaventure's Interpretation of the Evangelical Preaching of St. Francis,’ in S. Bonaventura, 1274–1974 II 214, 219.Google Scholar

^{page 214 note 131} In Hex. I 27, 28, 30 (Opera V 334).Google Scholar

^{page 214 note 1} Augustine, De doctrina christiana IV 18–19 (CSEL 80.122).Google Scholar

^{page 214 note 2} De reductione artium 5 (Opera V 321).Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 3} Chenu, M.-D., La Théologie au douzième siècle (Paris 1957) 172–78: ‘La mentalité symbolique’; Zinn, art. cit. (supra n. 6).Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 4} For example, De doctrina I 4–6; II 6–7 (CSEL 80.9, 35).Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 5} De sacramentis christianae fidei Prol. 5 (PL 176.185).Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 6} De sacr. Prol. 1 (PL 176.183).Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 7} De sacr. 1 pt. 1 28 (PL 176.204).Google Scholar

^{page 215 note 8} De sacr. Prol. 3; I pt. 5 5; I pt. 6 17 (PL 176.189, 249, 273–74).Google Scholar

^{page 216 note 9} De sacr. 1 pt. 1 2 (PL 176.188).Google Scholar

^{page 216 note 10} De sacr. 1 pt. 1 3 (PL 176.188–89).Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 11} Cicero, De inventione 1.5.7 (Loeb ed. 14–17); 1.9.12 (Loeb ed. 24–27); Rhetorica ad Herennium 4.55.68–69 (Loeb ed. 405–409) (demonstratio); 3.6.10–18.15 (Loeb ed. 172–85) (genus demonstrativum); Quintilian, Inst. orat. 2.10.11; 3.12–14 (ed. cit. 276–77, 394–97); Boethius, De topicis differentiis IV (PL 64.1207); Isidore of Seville, Etymologiae (ed. Lindsay) 2.4.1–8 (genus demonstrativum); 2.9.11–12 (the ostensibile kind of enthymeme); 2.21.33 (energia — Greek term equivalent to demonstratio). See Bonaventure, , In Hex. IV 21–22 (Opera V 353).Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 12} Cicero, Partitiones oratoriae 6.20 (ed. Wilkins); Quintilian, Inst. orat. 6.2.32–33 (ed. Winterbottom 434–37).Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 13} De sacr. 1 pt. 1 4 (PL 176.189).Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 14} Cicero, De inventione 1.5.7 (Loeb ed. 14–17).Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 15} De sacr. 1 pt. 1 8 (PL 176.193).Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 16} De sacr. 1 pt. 1 9 (PL 176.193–94).Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 17} De sacr. 1 pt. 1 9 (PL 176.194).Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 18} De sacr. 1 pt. 1 10 (PL 176.194–95).Google Scholar

^{page 217 note 19} De sacr. 1 pt. 1 11 (PL 176.195).Google Scholar

^{page 218 note 20} De sacr. 1 pt. 1 12 (PL 176.195–96).Google Scholar

^{page 218 note 21} De sacr. 1 pt. 1 12 (PL 176.196).Google Scholar

^{page 218 note 22} Gilson 253.Google Scholar