¹ Summa Theol., II^a II^ae, 171, art. 1 and 3.

² Ibid., II^a II^ae, 171, art. 3: Ultimus autem gradus est eorum quae sunt procul ab omnium hominum cognitione, quia in seipsis non sunt cognoscibilia, ut contingentia futura, quorum veritas non est determinata.

³ Ibid., II^a II^ae, 172, art. 4 and 6.

⁴ Ibid., II^a II^ae, 171, art. 6, ad 2.

⁵ For instance Gebeno (see below p. 170 n. 25) defended Hildegard's prophecies against those who refused to read her writings because of their obscurity by retorting that they did not understand, ‘quod hoc est argumentum verae prophetiae’ (Pitra, J. B., Analecta Sacra (1876–1891) viii, p. 483)Google Scholar.

⁶ Charles, R. H., Commentary on the Book of Daniel (Oxford, 1929), p. 170Google Scholar.

⁷ Dan. vii, 24–25.

⁸ Migne, , Pat. Lat., xxv, 1352–53Google Scholar.

⁹ The main text is Paulus Albarus, Indiculus luminosus (Migne, , Pat. Lat., cxxi)Google Scholar , on which see Colbert, E. P., The Martyrs of Córdoba (850–859): A Study of the Sources, Catholic University of America, Studies in Medieval History, New Series, xvii (Washington, D.C., 1962)Google Scholar.

¹⁰ Rev. vi, 1–17; viii, I.

¹¹ Bede, Comm. in Apoc. (Migne, , Pat. Lat., xciii, 129)Google Scholar.

¹² Anselm, of Havelberg, Dialogi, ed. Salet, G., Sources Chrétiennes, cxviii (1966), pp. 68–106Google Scholar.

¹³ See Smalley, B., ‘Ralph of Flaix on Leviticus’, Recherches de Théologie ancienne et médiévale, xxxv (1968), pp. 35–82Google Scholar , for a contemporary protest (pp. 39–42) against the general indifference to the coming of Antichrist. I have to thank Miss Smalley for calling my attention to this passage.

¹⁴ The fundamental work on the sibylline literature in the Middle Ages remains Sackur, E., Sibyllinische Texte und Forschungen (Halle, 1898)Google Scholar. For some interesting examples of translations from the Greek between the seventh and ninth centuries, see Bischoff, B., ‘Die lat. Übersetzungen u. Bearbeitungen ausden Oracula Sibyllina’, Mittelalterliche Studien, i (1966), pp. 150–71Google Scholar; and for a valuable account of the Byzantine tradition, see Alexander, P. J., The Oracle of Baalbek: the Tiburtine Sibyl in Greek dress (Washington, D.C., 1967)Google Scholar , and ‘Historiens byzantins et croyances eschatologiques’, Actes du XII^e Congrès Intern, des études byzantines, 1961 (Belgrade, 1964), iiGoogle Scholar.

¹⁵ Abelard gives a striking testimony to the role of the sibyls in broadening the stream of Revelation: ‘Cum itaque Dominus, et per prophetas Iudaeis et per praestantes philosophos seu vates gentibus, catholicae fidei tenorem annuntiaverit, inexcusabiles redduntur tam Iudaei quam gentes si…ipsos non audiant. Et quidem multi ex gentibus, nonnulli ex Iudaeis, in hoc quoque a doctoribus populi sui instructi fidem sanctae Trinitatis recognoverunt, in uno corpore ecclesiae quasi duo parietes coniuncti.’ Theologia Christiana, 1, 136 (Migne, , Pat. Lat., clxxviii, 1166)Google Scholar.

¹⁶ For this incident see Grundmann, H. in Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters, xvi (1960), p. 491Google Scholar.

¹⁷ The text was the Sibylla Samica (ed. Holder-Egger, O. in Neues Archiv, xv (1890), p. 177)Google Scholar.

¹⁸ The text of Merlin's prophecies forms chapters 112–117 of Geoffrey of Monmouth's Historia Regum Britanniae, in Faral, E., La Légende Arthurienne (Paris, 1929), iii, pp. 191–202Google Scholar. There is a lively account of the huge literary success of the prophetic genre founded by Geoffrey of Monmouth in Zhumthor, P., Merlin le Prophète (Lausanne, 1943)Google Scholar (with full bibliography), where the emphasis is too exclusively on literary invention rather than historical thought.

¹⁹ Ep. 176 (Migne, , Pat. Lat., cxcix, 171)Google Scholar.

²⁰ The Prophetia Merlini cum expositione Johannis Cornubiensis was printed rather inaccurately from Vatican MS. Ottob. 1474 by Greith, C. in his Spicilegium Vaticanum (Frauenfeld, 1838), pp. 98–106Google Scholar with an address to if. R. Oxoniensi; but Delisle (Bibliothèque de I'Ecole des Chartres, xxxcii (1876), p. 518)Google Scholar reported that the correct reading is R. presuli Exoniensi. This could be either Robert Warelwast 1137–55, or Robert of Salisbury (or Chichester) 1155–60. But since the prophecy seems to refer to the death of Count Conan in 1171, and since John of Cornwall was probably still studying in France in 1160, it seems likely that ‘R’ is a mistake for B(artholomew), Bishop of Exeter 1161–84. For John of Cornwall's career, see Rathbone, E., ‘John of Cornwall; a brief biography’, Recherches de théologie ancienne et médiévale, xvii (1950), pp. 46–60Google Scholar.

²¹ This is what Gerald calls his Expugnatio Hibernica (Opera Omnia (Rolls Series), i, 414; iii, 333; viii, 159, etc.), in which he made full use of the prophecies of Merlin and the Celtic bards; but the concluding book in which, as Gerald announced, he would collect and translate further, orally transmitted prophecies, was never written.

²² William of Newburgh's main objection to Merlin's prophecies was that he received his knowledge of the future from his demon father. Since demons, being shut out from the light of God, have no knowledge of the future, but can only make plausible conjectures about it, Merlin's testimony (quite apart from Geoffrey of Monmouth's fraudulent additions) was not to be relied on (Hist. return Anglicarum, in Chronicles of the Reigns of Stephen, Henry II and Richard I (Rolls Series), i, p. 12. This objection may be compared with the explanation given to Dante by Farinata, in Inferno, x, 100–5Google Scholar , that the damned have an imperfect vision of distant events and no knowledge of present events on earth. These were both highly personal views. Thomas Aquinas expressed a more general view when he granted the validity, within limits, of demonically inspired prophecy (Summa Theol., II^a, II^ae, 172, art. 5 and 6).

²³ For her letters and consultations, see Pitra, J. B., Nova S. Hildegardis Opera, Analecta Sacra, viiiGoogle Scholar , and Migne, , Pat. Lat., cxcvii, 145–382Google Scholar. There is a useful account of her main book of visions with reproductions of contemporary illustrations and a German translation by Böckler, M., Hildegard von Bingen, Wisse die Wege (Scivias), 1954Google Scholar In the Preface to this work Hildegard tells us that she began to understand her visionary experiences in 1141, when she was 42 years old. After this date her fame as a consultant steadily grew.

²⁴ Ep. cxcix (Migne, , Pat. Lat., cxcix, 220)Google Scholar.

²⁵ In 1222 Gebeno, Prior of Cîteaux, made a selection and arrangement of Hildegard's visions to elucidate ‘ea quae de futuris temporibus et de Anti-christo prophetavit’. His purpose was to confute ‘the frivolous and vain prophets of th e present day’ who said that Antichrist had already been born.

²⁶ The earliest book of practical astrology which circulated in the West from the eleventh century onwards was Julius Firmicus, Mathesis. This was a literary and philosophical work which provided no basis for measurement or scientific observation. Nevertheless it was already attracting attention by the beginning of the twelfth century, as we know from the comments made when Gerard, Archbishop of York, who died suddenly in 1108, was found dead with a copy under his head (William, of Malmesbury, Gesta pontificum (Rolls Series), pp. 259–60)Google Scholar. For the introduction of the astrolabe which made measurement possible, and for the Arabic tables which made measurements generally accessible, see Haskins, C. H., Studies in the History of Medieval Science (Cambridge, Mass., 1924), pp. 82–128Google Scholar. I have traced the progress of the subject at Worcester in the early twelfth century in Medieval Humanism and other Studies (Oxford, 1970), pp. 168–71Google Scholar.

²⁷ Roger of Howden has preserved the predictions which ‘universi fere orbis conjectores tarn Graeci quam Latini’ wrote for 1186 (Benedict, of Peterborough, Gesta regis Henrici secundi (Rolls Series), i, 324–28Google Scholar; Chronica Rogeri de Hoveden (Rolls Series), ii, pp. 290–98).

²⁸ For the links between astrology and prophecy in the later Middle Ages see Kurze, D., Johannes Lichtenberger (1503): Eine Studie zur Geschichte der Prophetie u. Astrologie (Lübeck, 1960)Google Scholar (summarized in the author's ‘Prophecy and History’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, xxi (1958), pp. 63–85)Google Scholar; also Wedel, T. O., The Medieval Attitude towards Astrology (Yale Studies in English, lx, 1920)Google Scholar , where the sources are discussed. There is a very interesting scholastic treatment of the whole subject by the early fourteenth-century English theologian Henry de Harkeley in his Quaestio ‘Utrum Astrologi vel quicumque calculatores possint probare secundum Adventum Christi’ (ed. Pelster, F., Archivio italiano per la storia della pietá, i (1951), pp. 328–76)Google Scholar.

²⁹ This passage occurs in an introductory summary of the Opus Maius, which Bacon wrote in 1266–1267 (pr. by Gasquet, A., English Historical Review, xii (1897), pp. 514–15)Google Scholar. There is a similar passage in the Opus Maius, ed. Bridges, J. H. (Oxford, 1897–1900), i, pp. 268–9Google Scholar , where instead of ‘other pagan prophets’ he mentions ‘Aquila, Sesto, Joachim and other prophets’.

³⁰ Reeves, M. E., The Influence of Prophecy in the later Middle Ages: a Study in Joachimism (Oxford, 1969)Google Scholar.

³¹ For the development of Joachim's thought see Reeves, op. cit., pp. 3–30. Among older works Grundmann, H., Neue Forschungen ülber Joachim von Fiore (Marburg, 1950)Google Scholar , and ‘Joachim von Fiore und Rainer von Ponza’, Deutsches Archiv, xvi (1960), pp. 437–546Google Scholar , are especially valuable. In addition to the contemporary records edited by Grundmann, the account of Joachim's early writing by Lucas, of Casamari (Ada Sanctorum, Maius, vii, 91–92)Google Scholar , the record of his interview with Richard I in 1190 (Benedict, of Peterborough, op. cit., ii, pp. 151–55Google Scholar , and Roger, of Hoveden, op. cit., iii, pp. 75–79)Google Scholar , and his interview with Adam of Perseigne (Ralph, of Coggeshall, Chronicon Anglicanum (Rolls Series), pp. 67–71)Google Scholar are of fundamental importance.

³² The essential text on this point is 2 Thess. ii, 7, which was always taken to mean that Antichrist would not appear so long as the Roman Empire, or alternatively the temporal power of the Papacy, lasted. For the later medieval developments of the theme see Reeves, M. E., op. cit., pp. 293–392Google Scholar , ‘Antichrist and the last World Emperor’.

³³ Registrum, xvi, 28 (Migne, , Pat. Lat. ccxvi, 817–22)Google Scholar.

³⁴ For this aspect of Joachim's thought, see Reeves, , op. cit., pp. 303–05Google Scholar.

³⁵ For these successive postponements, see Reeves, , op. cit., pp. 48–51, 54, 58–59, 83, 228, 246, 308, 313–14, 316, 322, 368Google Scholar.

³⁶ Opera, ed. Horsley, S. (London, 1779–1785), v, 297–491Google Scholar. The first edition appeared in 1733. Whiston's, WilliamNew Theory of the Earth from its Original to the Consummation of all Things (London, 1696)Google Scholar , and Astronomical Principles of Religion Natural and Revealed (London, 1717),Google Scholar which were dedicated to Newton, make an interesting attempt to combine biblical prophecy with Newtonian astronomy. Newton may originally have welcomed the attempt, but he later rejected the author.

³⁷ Ibid., p. 449.

³⁸ Ibid., p. 305.

³⁹ Ibid., p. 364.

⁴⁰ Ibid., p. 450.