Many thinkers, Thomists especially, view the real distinction between being and essence as one of the most important topics in philosophy. It is certainly one of the most intriguing. The philosophical development of this doctrine has thus been amply dealt with by historians of philosophy. The extent to which William of Auvergne has contributed to such development has, however, been a matter of considerable disagreement. In fact, scholars differ radically in their interpretations of William's distinction between being and essence. In this article, I shall attempt to make as clear as possible William's understanding of the distinction between being and essence. Specifically, I shall try to answer the question of whether or not he holds a real distinction between being and essence. To do so, I shall look closely at certain texts of William that are relevant to the question. I shall also provide a brief account of some of the more important and representative commentaries on William's understanding of this distinction.

In a recent article on the study of Boethian logical works during the Middle Ages, Osmund Lewry discusses the revival of logical studies at the end of the tenth century, focusing on the period after ca. 970 when Abbo of Fleury and Gerbert of Aurillac (later Pope Sylvester II) renewed the teaching and study of dialectical works, and when Notker Labeo translated some logical texts into German. To this small group of tenth-century scholars known to have been concerned with dialectic and philosophy may be added the name of Heriger, schoolmaster and abbot (990–1007) of the Belgian monastery of Lobbes. The present study begins with the identification of quotations by Heriger from dialectical and philosophical works, then discusses Heriger's use of dialectic in theological argumentation, and finally considers the influence of his philosophical teaching at Lobbes. Heriger's interest in dialectic is revealed by quotations in his Vita Remacli from Boethius' In Topica Ciceronis and Apuleius' Peri Hermeneias. These quotations are identified for the first time in the present study. The application of dialectical learning to theological questions, specifically his use of logical principles in his tract De corpore et sanguine domini (PL 139.179–88), indicates that Heriger's quotations from logical texts reflect more than bookish antiquarianism; the study of dialectic was useful to him in theological argumentation. The evidence of Heriger's philosophical pursuits provides the first clear indication that Lobbes was one of the important Lotharingian centers for philosophical studies.

Perhaps this article had best begin with an apology. One need not be very conversant with the biography of St. Thomas to know that the points of contact between him and France were comparatively few and that he never was particularly attracted towards a country long the enemy of his own. And still, even before the points of contact did exist, very little experience could not fail to teach him that France was no negligible factor in the affairs of the world and that whether he liked it or not, he could not ignore her thought or her politics. As years passed by, he had opportunities to pay the neighboring nation occasional visits, he made the personal acquaintance of some of her more or less eminent representatives, and a time came when he had to discuss State matters for his country with a few of them. That was not all, and almost on his last day, at the solemn hour of his trial, the name of France was on his lips. These few facts seem sufficient proof to the present writer that his country cannot have left his favorite saint indifferent (Ch. I), and he feels the more drawn towards an inquiry into the matter as he is sure that his favorite saint, in turn, is far from having left some at least of his compatriots indifferent in the course of the last four centuries (Ch. II).

In a recent issue of Traditio, Sister M. Teresa Brady demonstrates clearly that the late fourteenth-century devotional work The Pore Caitif, which she is confident is wholly orthodox, has made extensive use of some of the material produced in the well-organized and well-financed centers of Lollardy which Anne Hudson has shown to have been active at the time. Her demonstration starts with, and is clearest for, the Glossed Gospels, a series of commentaries on the four Gospels consisting entirely of translations from the works of standard authorities, mostly patristic, and based on the Catena Aurea, but including also quotations from authors more nearly contemporary, such as Grosseteste, John of Abbeville, FitzRalph, and William Peraldus. In establishing so clearly the use of the Glossed Gospels (hereafter GG) Sister Teresa claims justly to have found the first stone in the metaphorical arch which I once suggested should link Bible translation and tract production, though her tracts are orthodox, not the Lollard ones the metaphor envisaged.

In his Quaestiones et responsiones (PG 89.524d–525b) Anastasius Sinaita tells a story about three magi, Apollonius of Tyana, Julianus, and Apuleius, a story which he says is found ἐν τοῖς τῶν ἐϱχαιοτέϱων ἐνδϱῶν διηγήμασι. When Rome was suffering from a plague, the emperor Domitian summoned the three magi to the city and asked for their help. Apuleius told the emperor that he could put an end to the plague in a third of the city within fifteen days. Apollonius claimed that he could perform the same feat in another third of the city within only ten days. But Julianus, objecting that the plague would destroy the city before fifteen days could pass, put an end to it immediately in the remaining third of the city. Domitian then asked Julianus to free the other two-thirds of Rome from the plague, and he quickly did so.

En vertu du c. 1508 du Code de droit canonique, qu'il s'agisse de prescription acquisitive ou de prescription extinctive, I'Église reçoit dans son droit propre la législation de chaque nation, sauf quelques réserves contenues dans les cc. 1509–1512. Dans quelle mesure les canonistes contemporains ont-ils tenu compte de cette nouvelle législation dans I'élaboration de leur doctrine de la prescription, eu égard, par exemple, au droit civil beIge ou français?

In 1912 Prof. Ludwig Baur published among the philosophical works of Robert Grosseteste a short treatise entitled De finitate motus et temporis, which, as he pointed out, was nearly identical with the concluding section of Grosseteste's Commentary on the Physics. Baur however knew only one independent manuscript of the De finitate and based his edition upon this one manuscript and two Oxford manuscripts of the Physics commentary. In 1940 Prof. S. Harrison Thomson listed four additional manuscripts which contain De finitate as an independent work. In the course of preparing a critical edition of the Commentary on the Physics, I found it necessary to consult these manuscripts and thereby became aware of the inadequacy of Baur's treatment of De finitate.

The initial date chosen for this survey is the beginning of the publication of the Journal of the History of Ideas in 1940; the final date, 1952, is that of the appearance of A Syntopicon of Great Books of the Western World. These two events mark the two principal directions in which the method of the historical study of ideas has moved on this continent: first toward the analytical study of ‘unit ideas’ as defined by Arthur O. Lovejoy (especially in The Great Chain of Being, 1936), who is also the intellectual father of the Journal of the History of Ideas; secondly toward the synthetic ‘recording’ of the main currents and aspects of the ideological tradition of the West in its entirety, unity, and continuity, as aimed at by the Great Books program of Robert M. Hutchins, Mortimer J. Adler, and their collaborators.

When in the early morning hours of February 14, 1130, Pope Honorius II closed his eyes forever, a crisis within the Church of Rome broke into the open which long had been in the making. The forces which had dominated the Curia for eighty years, which had given to the world the great popes of the Reform, were challenged and swept aside by the revolution of an energetic minority which during less than a decade had steadily increased its influence in the Sacred College. Its undisputed leader was the Chancellor Haimeric, a Frenchman who had been appointed to his high office in 1123 by the French Pope Calixtus II. It was he who devised the measures which were to insure the succession to his party, measures which under the circumstances were bound to result in an uncanonical election, and, as a natural consequence, in a second election by the outraged majority.

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.

Le ms. H. 308 de l'É cole de Médecine àMontpellier contient une collection de textes patriotiques et conciliaires qui a livré plusieurs pièces de grande valeur. En 1656, le jésuite P. F. Chifflet en a tiré de très importants fragments de l'ouvrage perdu de Fulgence de Ruspe, Contra Fabianum. Il a également servi àSchwartz, avec un seul autre ms. de Paris, pour son édition d'une lettre de Jean II, déjà publiee par Sichard. Le même critique l'utilise aussi pour de nombreuses pièces des conciles de Chalcédoine et d'É phèse. En préface de son édition de la lettre de Jean II, il a donné une description du contenu, et il nous avertit qu'il l'a faite d'autant plus volontiers qu'il s'agit d'un genre d'ouvrage fort peu étudié. Je crois pouvoir apporter ici des indications précises sur l'origine de la collection.

Eadmer of Canterbury, companion for many years and biographer of St. Anselm of Canterbury, is best known for his two intimate records of Anselm's episcopate and personality: the Historia Novorum in Anglia and the Vita Anselmi. He is also the author of various devotional works, among them a minor classic on the Immaculate Conception, and of several saints' lives. As a hagiographer he recorded the lives and miracles of saints whose relics were preserved in his house, Christ Church, Canterbury, or the priory of the Holy Trinity, as it was known in the Middle Ages. Apart from his longer lives of St. Wilfrid, St. Oda, St. Dunstan, and St. Oswald, Eadmer wrote some shorter hagiographical works, one of them on Bregwine, archbishop of Canterbury in the eighth century. The life of Bregwine has never been printed in its entirety. It is my purpose in the following pages to edit the complete text of this work.

The versicles, Salvum fac servum tuum, etc., which are written by another scribe after the Agnus Dei in Missal W 11 (fol. 12r) of the Walters Art Gallery of Baltimore, are a formula—the shorter and, as I believe, the, older of the two formulae still printed in the Monastic Breviary—for the blessing of the weekly reader prescribed in Chapter xxxviii of St. Benedict's —Regula Monasteriorum. Since St. Benedict directs that the reader is to ask for the blessing on Sunday ‘post Missas et Communionem,’ the insertion of the formula at this point, that is, after the Ordinarium Missae, as we call it to-day, is not surprising. It is found similarly placed in at least one other book, the Sacramentarium Fuldense saeculi X, in which it is preceded by a title, Oratio pro ebdomadario refectorii lectore. Besides this Fulda book and our Walters Missal, the text is found in several customaries and ordinals which will be mentioned below, but for its earliest occurrence we must go to the commentary on the Holy Rule composed before 774 by Paul the Deacon in the monastery on Monte Pedale near Civate in the diocese of Milan. Accordingly, it is found also in the commentary ascribed to Hildemar, an amplified recension of the work of the Lombard monk of the preceding century.

Der Codex Berolinensis 77 (Phillips 1481, xii. Jahrhdt.) enthält fol. 233r-235r und fol. 246v-249v drei unedierte Homilien unter dem viel missbrauchten Namen des hl. Chrysostomus. Schon die erstmalige Lektüre zeigt klar, dass Chrysostomus hier nicht in Frage kommt. Inhalt, Stil und Sprache weisen in andere Richtung. Ein genaueres Studium der Texte zeigt eine ziemlich weitgehende Verwandtschaft mit den Gedanken und Redewendungen der christologischen Diskussionen, die mit Eustathius von Antiochien und Diodor von Tarsus ihren Anfang nahmen, durch Theodor von Mopsuestia eine gewisse Verschärfung erfuhren und mit Nestorius ihren Höhepunkt erreichten. Man wird also zunächst bei diesen Namen, die alle der antiochenischen Schule angehören, stehen bleiben dürfen. Die ausdrückliche und einmütige Bezeugung der Handschriften für Chrysostomus, der ebenfalls Antiochener war, legt den Gedanken nahe, dass man die Homilien schon sehr frühe, wohl nicht ohne bestimmte Absicht, unter die schützende Obhut eines anerkannt gefeierten Namens gestellt hat. So ist z.B. gerade von Nestorius bekannt, dass seine Anhänger früher oder später dessen Schriften unter falschem Namen zu erhalten und zu verbreiten suchten. Bekanntlich hatte Kaiser Theodosius II. im Jahre 435 den Befehl gegeben, sämtliche Schriften des Nestorius zu verbrennen. Dem kaiserlichen Befehl ist ohne Zweifel in weitgehendem Maasse entsprochen worden, denn es hat sich unter des Nestorius eigenem Namen, ausser grösstenteils vorephesinischen Fragmenten und Zitaten, ganz wenig erhalten; anderes nur unter fremdem Namen und zwar hauptsächlich unter dem seines grossen Landsmannes und Vorgängers Chrysostomus. Ähnlich erging es später auch Diodor und Theodor.

A passing reference to pagan gods in the preface to the Merovingian Vita Landiberti inspired a number of poetic elaborations in the reworkings of the Life of St. Lambert during the late Carolingian period. These include the opening chapters of the Carmen de Sancto Landberto, which deal exclusively with pagan myths; the Versus in Laude Beati Landberti; and passages in the Vita Landberti of Stephen, Bishop of Liege (901–920). This paper is concerned primarily with the first two of these reworkings, which contain the more elaborate treatments of pagan mythology. The inspiration for the inclusion of these passages, as well as the sources for their information about the pagan gods, form a curious chapter in the survival and transformation of the pagan gods in medieval Latin literature.

“Aτη was an important concept for Aeschylus. A merely numerical comparison of the passages in which ἄτη appears in pre-Aeschylean authors with the number of such Aeschylean passages makes this clear. In what remains to us of Greek literature from Homer to Pindar ἄτη occurs fifty times. In the seven extant plays of Aeschylus the word occurs with certainty forty-eight times. Thus, in the work of one author whose career spans the first four decades of the fifth century ἄτη is employed approximately as often as it had been in the remaining literary tradition of the previous three centuries.