Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
The Twelfth-Century School Of St. Victor
(USC Thesis Other)
The Twelfth-Century School Of St. Victor
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
THE TWELFTH-CENTURY SCHOOL OF ST. VICTOR by Penny McElroy Wheeler A D i s s e r t a t io n P resen ted to th e FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In P a r t i a l F u lfillm e n t of the Requirements f o r th e Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (H istory) June 1970 71-7749 WHEELER, Penny McElroy, 1943- THE TWELFTH-CENTURY SCHOOL OF ST. VICTOR. University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1970 History, medieval University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan Copyright by PEX'NY Me ELROY Y/HEELER 1971 THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED UNIVERSITY O F SO U TH ER N CALIFORNIA TH E G R A D U A T E SC H O O L U N IV E R SIT Y PARK LO S A N G E L E S , C A L IF O R N IA 9 0 0 0 7 This dissertation, written by Penny McElroy Whoeler................................. under the direction of h Dissertation Com mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by The Gradu ate School, in partial fulfillment of require ments of the degree of D O C T O R O F P H I L O S O P H Y Dean DISSERTATION COMMITTEE I Chairman TABLE OF CONTENTS I . William of Champeaux and the Founding o f the Abbey. 1 I I . The V ic to rin e Community...................................................................15 I I I . The School a t S t . V i c t o r ...................................... 29 IV. Hugh of S t . V i c t o r ............................................................... 43 V. Andrew o f S t. V i c t o r ..........................................................................69 V I. Achard o f S t. V i c t o r ..........................................................................86 V II. Richard o f S t. V i c t o r ......................................................................102 V I I I . Godfrey o f S t. V ic to r . .................................................. 129 IX. W alter o f S t. V i c t o r ........................................................................138 X. Adam of S t. V i c t o r .............................................................................144 XI. Poets* P rea c h e rs and Penanse.....................................................158 X II. C o nclusion........................................................................ 167 APPENDIX I E p is tle of Laurence o f W estm inster to M aurice. . . 172 APPENDIX I I E p is tle o f Odo o f Morlmond to P e te r o f Traves. . . 174 APPENDIX I I I V a ria tio n s on th e A r i s t o t e l i a n d iv is io n o f knowledge 178 APPENDIX IV The School of S t. V ic to r and th e C h r is to lo g ic a l Dis p u te s : Robert of C ric k la d e .............................................................. 180 BIBLIOGRAPHY 182 INTRODUCTION The purpose of t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n is to tra c e the de velopment of the tw e lf th - c e n tu r y School of S t. V ic to r, th a t unique product of th e Gregorian Refonn, which bridged the gap between monks and s c h o la rs to e s t a b l i s h an imposing e d i f ic e of C h ristia n le a r n in g . The term " C h ris tia n human ism" w i l l be used here to denote th a t a t t i t u d e which con s id e r s apprehension of the f i n i t e world d e s ir a b le i f man is to f u l f i l l h is d iv in e d e s tin y . This a t t i t u d e regards knowledge of the n a tu r a l world as a l o g ic a l p re lu d e to knowledge of the s u p e rn a tu r a l. I propose to show t h a t the p r e v a ilin g t r a d i t i o n of the School of S t. V ic to r was not m ysticism as is commonly sup posed, but r a t h e r C h ris tia n humanism. Hugh and Richard of S t. V ic to r , w hile c e r t a i n l y profound m y stic s, each e l u c i dated th e p r i n c i p l e s of C h ris tia n humanism in m ajor t r e a t i s e s , and t h e i r i n t e l l e c t u a l l i f e work was a memorial to th e se p r i n c i p l e s . I in te n d to show how t h i s id e a l o f C h ris tia n humanism was n u rtu re d a t th e P a ris School o f S t. V ic to r du rin g th e f i r s t h a l f of the t w e l f th c e n tu ry , and how the id e a l faded i i i and e v e n tu a lly was re p u d ia te d as the century drew to a c lo s e . F in a lly I hope to dem onstrate th a t as th e id e a l of C h r is tia n humanism was abandoned* the School of S t. V ic to r l o s t i t s in flu e n c e in the i n t e l l e c t u a l world of th e l a t e t w e l f th and e a r ly t h i r t e e n t h cen tu ry . I t 1 I WILLIAM OP CHAMFEAUX AND THE POUNDING OP THE ABBEY The abbey of S t. V ic to r wasr-f ounded in the s p i r i t of th e G regorian Refonn as embodied in the A ugustinian Rule. I t was t h i s r e l ig i o u s c o n s ti t u t i o n s e t down c e n tu r ie s before by S t. Augustine which was to produce the canons r e g u la r . These b r e th re n were bound n e ith e r by the s t r i c t u r e s of the m onastic l i f e nor by the p a s t o r a l cares o f the s e c u la r c le rg y . T heir l i v e s were devoted to p ra y e r and to work. They a ls o enjoyed a b r i l l i a n t r e p u ta tio n f o r C h ristia n le a r n in g . The Regula S an cti A u gustini or A ugustinian R ule, based l a r g e ly on th e s a i n t ' s w r i ti n g s , was compiled probably in th e m i d - f i f t h cen tu ry by one of h is fo llo w e rs . A fte r h is baptism Augustine had r e t i r e d to a l i f e of m onastic s e c lu sio n a t T a g aste. He soon was ordained a p r i e s t and in 395 became c o a d ju to r bish o p of Hippo. Augustine however could n o t b r in g h im se lf to give up h is m onastic l i f e . Hence h is e p is c o p a l re sid e n c e became an ep isc o p a l m onastery, wherein dwelt Augustine and h is c l e r i c a l a s s i s t a n t s , known as cancns (c a n o n ic i) because as ord ain ed p r i e s t s they were l i s t e d in th e o f f i c i a l r e g i s t e r (canon) o f the Church. They liv e d a common l i f e , renouncing any claim to p e rso n a l p r o p e rty . 2 They were guided by p re c e p ts which th e s a i n t l y bishop had s p e lle d out in h is De opere monachorum and h is De moribus e c c le s la e c a t h o l i c a e , and which l a t e r appeared as the Regu- l a S an cti A u g u s tln i. The liv e s of th ese "A ugustinian canons" were marked by th re e b a s ic c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s : they were in holy o rd e rs ; they liv e d to g e th e r , h o ld in g no p e rso n a l p ro p e rty : and they f o l lowed th e Rule of S t. A ugustine. In the e a r ly middle ages however many of th e c a th e d ra ls and most of the r u r a l c o l l e g i a t e churches follow ed a much la x e r r u le which enabled them to have p erso n al p ro p e rty and in some cases even sepa r a t e re s id e n c e s . More o fte n they shared a common t a b l e and dorm itory in th e c l e r i c a l re sid e n c e . Throughout the e a rly middle ages attem p ts were made to r e - e s t a b l i s h th e f u l l communal l i f e among c a th e d r a l canons. In m id -e ig h th century Bishop Chrodegang of Metz drew up the Regula canonicorum in which he t r i e d to come to g r ip s w ith th e problem. By t h i s time however two re c o g n iz a b le c a te g o rie s o f canons were emerging: th o se who were c l o i s t e r e d and th o se who dw elt in th e towns. P r a c t i c a l c o n s id e ra tio n s d i c t a t e d t h a t only p a l l i a t i v e measures be tak en ; thus Chro degang s e t down a common usage f o r each group of canons. His work was c a r rie d on by Amalar of Metz, who was a u th o riz e d by the Council of Aachen (816) to draw up the famous I n a t i t u t i o canonicorum. However bo th Chrodegang and t a a l a r departed from the A ugustinian g u id e lin e , f o r t h e i r documents en jo in ed n e i t h e r the common l i f e nor re n u n c ia tio n of p r iv a te p ro p e rty . By t h i s time the A ugustinian Rule had alm ost d is a p p e a re d . I t had not been in c o rp o ra te d in to p r a c t i c a l usage sin ce the l a t e s ix th - c e n tu r y Regula T a rn a te n s is . 1 U n til the Gregorian Reform the A ugustinian Rule v i r t u a l l y was ig nored. But as Dickinson d em o n strates, a m ajor change in th e appearance o f th e Church had taken p lace between the Council of Aachen and th e G regorian epoch. Throughout w estern Christendom the lo c a l p a r is h church had p r o l i f e r a te d , w hile the c o lle g e s of canons had l o s t ground. So d i f f e r e n t was the r u r a l p a r is h p r i e s t from h i s urban coun t e r p a r t t h a t the term "canon" could no lo n g er d e s c rib e them b o th , bu t was used to d e s ig n a te only a person b elonging to a body of c l e r i c s a tta c h e d to a la rg e church. By m id -elev e n th century many abuses had c re p t in to th e s e c u la r c le riB y . Human f r a i l t y i s no r e s p e c t e r of o f f i c e . 1. J . C. D ickinson, The O rigins of th e A ustin Canons and T h e ir In tro d u c tio n in to England (London,1950), pp. 20, 261. 4 M arriages among the r u r a l clerg y were condemned not in fre q u e n tly by th o se very bishops who had made t h e i r peace w ith th e c ra ss p o l i t i c a l w orld. By 1050 many of the canons had s e p a ra te d them selves from the c a th e d r a ls . Some of th e c le r ic s * having a cq u ired co n sid e ra b le p e rso n a l p ro p e rty , were li v i n g li k e w ealthy and p r o f l i g a t e country s q u ir e s . The reform of th e canons was p a r t and p a r c e l of the Gregorian Reform* t h a t g r e a t campaign a g a in s t th e s e c u l a r i s a t i o n of church p ro p e rty and th e d e c lin e of c l e r i c a l m orals which took p la c e between approxim ately 1050 and 1125. I t was during t h i s p erio d t h a t th e Order of Canons Regular of S t. Augustine was r e - e s t a b l i s h e d , in an e f f o r t to remedy th e abuses by which th e c a th e d r a l clerg y had so c o rru p te d them selves. P e te r Damian2 was an u n t i r i n g c ru sad er f o r r e form of th e canons, having h im se lf been abbot of Ponte Avel- lo n a , a d aughter house o f Camaldoli. Two o th e r re fo rm e rs, 2. S t. P e te r Damian (ca. 1007-1072) was one of the most c e le b r a te d c l e r i c s of the e le v e n th c e n tu ry . Bora a t Ravenna where he endured much h a rd sh ip and p riv a tio n * he gained some renown as a te a c h e r and then r e t r e a t e d to th e herm itage of Ponte A vellona, becoming i t s abbot in 1043. In 1057 Pope Stephen IX e le v a te d P e te r to the C uria, and he became c a r d in a l bish o p of O s tia . He served as a t r u s t e d c o u n s e llo r to a su ccessio n o f popes* and be came famous f o r h i s reform ing zeal* His l a t e r y e a rs were sp e n t in q u ietu d e a t Ponte Avellona* in te r r u p te d only by p ap al d ip lo m a tic m issio n s. His name is most o f te n a s s o c ia te d w ith t h a t of S t . Pope Gregory V II f o r whom th e G regorian Reform was named. 5 whose names aie u s u a lly connected w ith the vigorous p ro se c u tio n o f h e re sy , were a ls o very a c tiv e in promoting the canons r e g u la r t Manegold, founder o f the abbey a t Lauten- bach, and Gerhoh, who e s ta b lis h e d a house of canons a t R eich ersb erg . Many communities o f canons r e g u la r were e s ta b lis h e d in Gascony. The most i n f l u e n t i a l e sta b lish m e n t was S t. Q uentin, founded a t Beauvais and confirmed in 1079. Largely through the e f f o r t s of i t s f i r s t abbot Yvo of Char t r e s who implemented and p o p u lariz ed the A ugustinian Rule, S t. Quentin became th e model house of th e o rd e r, and th e house a f t e r which the P a ris abbey of S t. V ic to r was p a t te rn e d . The P a r is abbey of S t. V ic to r was founded by the c e le b r a te d te a c h e r W illiam of Champeaux, d i r e c t o r of th e school a t Notre-Dame and archdeacon of P a r is . A fte r com pleting h is s tu d ie s w ith Manegold of Lautenbach a t P a ris and w ith R oscelin a t Compifegne, William ta u g h t d i a l e c t i c s a t the c a th e d ra l in 1095. He then journeyed to Laon to stu d y un der Anselm. On h is r e t u r n , Bishop Foulques of P a r is not only made him the f i r s t archdeacon of the d io c e se , b u t put him in charge of a l l th e schools o f P a r is . William of Champeaux was to become a very i n f l u e n t i a l f ig u r e . When Foulques died in 1104, W illiam le d the f i g h t to i n s t a l l Galon, th e can d id a te confirmed by th e pope, and re fu se d to 6 be in tim id a te d by th e tru c u le n c e of the French k in g , P h ilip I, In l a t e r y e a rs , as bishop of Ch&lons-sur-Marne, William would enjoy c o n sid e ra b le re p u te no t only as founder o f the famous abbey of S t. V ic to r , but a ls o as founder of th e ab bey of T ro is -F o n ta in e s , refo rm er of the r e l ig i o u s houses o f h is d io c e s e , f r ie n d and s p i r i t u a l a d v iso r of S t. Bernard, and ambassador of Pope C a lix tu s I I to Etaperor Henry V. But a l l t h i s was fa r in the f u tu r e . In 1108, f a tig u e d , d e p re sse d , and perhaps not a l i t t l e u n c e r ta in a f t e r th e l a t e s t b a t t l e w ith h is former p u p il P e te r Abelard over the q u e stio n o f u n iv e r s a le , Master Wil liam resig n ed h is a rc h d ia c o n a te . Accompanied by s e v e ra l devoted d i s c i p l e s — G ild u in , G odefroi, R obert, N a n tie r, Budes, Thomas, and o th e rs — th e beloved te a c h e r forsook h is s e c u la r d u tie s f o r th e co ntem plative l i f e . They r e t i r e d to the secluded w ild e rn e ss below M ont-Ste-G enevieve, on the l e f t bank of the S ein e, occupying th e a n c ie n t chapel and herm itage d e d ic a te d to S t . V ic to r . This fo u rth -c e n tu ry s o l d i e r m arty r had. been entombed a t M a rs e ille s , where so many m ira c le s were a t t r i b u t e d to hiB remains th a t John Cas- sia n had founded th e re two m o n asteries in honor of th e s a i n t . S everal o th e r c i t i e s , in clu d in g P a r i s , had e re c te d chapels under h is p a tro n a g e . The old V ic to rin e herm itage a t P a ris had been most r e - 7 c e n tly occupied by pious s o l i t a r i e s . On the d e a th of the l a s t re c lu s e — an a n c ie n t contem plative by th e name of B a s i l l a — Bishop Galon g ran ted William of Champeaux and h is fo llo w e rs th e p r iv i l e g e of occupying the d e c r e p it b u ild in g s . Seven y e a rs l a t e r , when Hugh a r riv e d a t the m onastery from th e abbey of M a rs e ille s in 1115, he brought w ith him the famous r e l i c s of S t. V ic to r. This t r a n s l a t i o n of th e p a tro n m a r ty r 's r e l i c s was a momentous event which th e poet Adam of S t. V ic to r was to d e s c rib e in one of h ie most Joyous sequences. When William of Champeaux and h i s fo llo w e rs r e t i r e d to the v acan t old herm itage in 1108, t h e i r I n te n tio n was to r e t r e a t in to s o l i t u d e , abandoning th e a c tiv e fo r th e con te m p la tiv e mode of l i f e . Kis old f r ie n d H ild e b e rt of La- v a r d in , in a most im portant l e t t e r to W illiam , was to ex claim : "The change which you have made in your way of l i f e r e j o ic e s my s o u l!" Indeed, r e g a rd le s s o f t h e i r i n t e n t i o n s , extreme poverty and m o r t i f i c a t i o n were n e c e s s i t a t e d by th e meagre re so u rc e s of th e h erm ita g e , f o r i t was not u n t i l 1113 th a t King Louis VI c h a rte re d the abbey. For the f iv e in te rv e n in g y e a r s , no endowments could be made. During t h i s tim e the b r e th re n m ain tain ed them selves by manual la b o r . The new co n tem p lativ es immediately assumed th e garb of 8 canons r e g u la r , and William of Champeaux d ra fte d a r u le en jo in in g s t r i c t s il e n c e , study o f sacred d o c tr in e , f r a t e r n a l c h a r i t y , h o s p i t a l i t y , p o v erty , f a s t i n g and obedience. I t thus appeared t h a t th e beloved m aster William had taken leave of th e i n t e l l e c t u a l world in which he had been so a c t i v e to e n te r upon almost a Buddhist mode of ex istence, seeking through s o litu d e and contem plation to achieve a m ystic u n ity w ith the T ranscendent. But William was a te a c h e r , and th o se who follow ed him in to s o litu d e were s tu d e n ts . Soon they began to f e e l the void which s c h o la rly p u r s u its no lo n g e r f i l l e d and e n tr e a te d him to resume h is te a c h in g th e re a t S t. V ic to r. W illiam of Champeaux, h im se lf a product of Laon where he had s tu d ie d w ith Anselm, was in tim a te ly f a m ilia r w ith th e c a th e d ra l school t r a d i t i o n . Rheims, Tours, A uxerre, Liege, O rleans, Le Mans, P o i t i e r s , Angers, Dijon — th e se c a th e d ra l sc h o o ls , g r e a t and sm all, were r e p o s i t o r ie s of th e seven l i b e r a l a r t s . Although two of the d i s c i p l i n e s — astronomy and music — had f a l l e n in to d esu etu d e, grammar and r h e t o r i c were to t h r i v e under th e care of th e Chart- r i a n s . D ia le c tic e s p e c ia lly was to b e n e f i t from the g ra d u a l in tro d u c tio n of A r i s t o t l e during the tw e lfth cen t u r y . Of course th e s e c u la r triv iu m and quadrlvium were augmented by s e v e ra l sacred s e p te n a r ie s : the seven deadly 9 s in s , the seven a r t i c l e s of the Credo and the seven o rd ers of th e c l e r i s y . By the tu rn of the century the n o rth o f Prance was b e coming the i n t e l l e c t u a l c ro ssro ad s of Christendom. P e te r Abelard was te a c h in g in P a r is . At C hartres Bishop Yvo b e queathed to h is b r o th e r Thierry a school which would con tin u e to f lo u r i s h fo r n e a rly a centujy . Elsewhere a n o th er aged scholar* Anselm of Laon, was about t o c lo se h is weary old eyes on the w arfare of h i s i n t e l l e c t u a l progeny — Wil liam of Champeaux and P e te r A belard, A lberic of Kheims and G ilb e rt o f la Porr6e. The poet H ild e b e rt of Lavardin, whose fru g a l verses were to win him much acclaim , was made bishop o f l e Mans. Two c a th e d r a l schools — P a ris and C hartres — had a t ta in e d c o n sid e ra b le prominence. In P a ris i t s e l f , b e sid e s the c a th e d r a l of Notre-Dame, th e r e were s e v e ra l o th e r sc h o o ls: the m onastery of St-M artin-des-Cham ps, th e abbeys of S t. Genevieve and S t-G erm ain-des-P res, as w e ll as the schools of th e P e tit- P o n t and o f "La Rue du Pouare" n ear S t- J u lie n - le - P a u v r e . P a ris was in the th ro e s of t h i s quickening academic tempo when W illiam of Champeaux founded the abbey o f S t. V ic to r . I t was soon to become th e i n t e l l e c t u a l lo d esto n e 10 of th e north* a t t r a c t i n g t o i t s c l o i s t e r e d p o r ta ls such men as Hugh and Richard of S t. V ic to r , P e te r Lombard, Robert of Melun, Thomas & Becket, and P e te r Comestor. In a most s i g n i f i c a n t l e t t e r H ild e b e rt of Lavardin persuaded W illiam th a t he could use the g r e a t t a l e n t God had given him w ith o u t compromising th e s p i r i t u a l i t y o f h is r e lig io u s e s ta b lis h m e n t, and th a t i t was in f a c t h is solemn duty t o do so: My so u l r e j o ic e s and e x u lts a t your conduct, and I o f f e r thanks fo r i t to Him to whom you owe the p r a c t i c e a t l a s t of tru e p h ilo so p h y . H ith e r to you were in e f f e c t b u t h a l f a p h ilo so p h e r s in c e in the school of the wise you had only the s l i g h t e s t apprehension o f the p e r f e c tio n of moral b eauty. Now indeed you have e x tr a c te d from i t , lik e sweet honey from i t s comb, th e formula o f th e good l i f e . Here i t is th a t you have put a s id e e c c l e s i a s t i c a l advancement and p r e f e r r e d "the low est p la c e in the house of your God to li v i n g in th e t e n t s o f the u n rig h te o u s ." Here i t i s th a t you w i l l pursue w ith inexorable h a te am bition and i t s p e r q u i s i t e s , t h a t you s i l l give up th e hawking of pedagogy, t h a t you judge "g o d lin ess w ith contentm ent to be g r e a t g a in ." Here f i n a l l y i t is t h a t you devote y o u r s e lf to the sphere of p e r f e c t i o n , t h a t you do not guide your l i f e by n a t u r a l i n s t i n c t s , paying le s s heed to th e c a p a b i l i t i e s of the f l e s h than to the a s p i r a t i o n s of th e s p i r i t . This is t r u t h is to be a p h ilo so p h e r, thus to l i v e is to e n te r in to a lread y g lo rio u s fe llo w sh ip w ith the powers of Heaven. Here i s th e s h o r t e s t ro u te to Heaven, w h ith e r you w i l l a r r i v e w ith th e g r e a t e r ease f o r t r a v e l l i n g unburdened. For our so u l is i t s own burden so long as i t h a l t s through hope o r f e a r . Ho one has ever y e t liv e d in b l i s s so long as he i s torm ented by delay in a t t a i n i n g h is d e s ir e or dread of lo s in g i t . Diogenes fe a re d no m an's power because he 11 hoped fo r no man's fa v o u r. He, in h is tub being as devoid of hope as he was of f e a r, transform ed h is p o v e rty i n to r i c h e s . Things which a cynic w ith o u t f a i t h abh o rred , i t is a l l th e more n eces sa ry th a t a C h ristia n d o cto r should abhor, sin ce t h a t manner of l i f e i s th e more f e r t i l e which is m otivated by f a i t h . These i t is t h a t menace w ith impediment and d elay th o se who have taken to the path s of v i r t u e . D is c re tio n of speech, modesty of manner, s t r i c t e s t adherence to th e demands of tr u e r e l i g i o n are the sig n s of tru e C h r i s t i a n i t y . Herein you w i l l d is p la y and express philosophy in p e r f e c tio n i f you a re moved n e i t h e r by hope nor f e a r . A man does not do a l l the good of which he is capable so long as he re fu s e s to be u s e fu l to o th e r s . I t is an a c t of p e r fe c tio n to o f f e r o n e 's neighbour the means of v i r t u e even i f he a lre a d y m isuse th e m .. .Render th e r e fo r e your whole s e l f to th e Lord Ood see in g you have vowed your whole s e l f to Him, o therw ise you sh rin k from th e promised s a c r i f i c e . What use a f t e r a l l is hidden wisdom or b u rie d t r e a s u r e ? . . . Is th e re any d i f f e r e n c e be tween common sto n es and jew els i f they are not d i s played to the l i g h t ? I t i s the same w ith le a r n in g ; when one shows i t to o th e rs i t b ears in c re a se : b u t , sco rn in g an a v a ric io u s owner, u n le s s i t i s shown to th e w orld, i t escapes from him. Take good care th e r e fo r e no t to deprive your b re th re n of th e fo u n ts o f l i v i n g w a te r, but as Solomon says "pour out the sp rin g s and spread t h e i r w aters a- b r o a d . "3 This l e t t e r can t r u l y be considered as the founding document, th e s p i r i t u a l c h a r t e r , of the abbey of S t. V ictor. I t draws the im portant d i s t i n c t i o n between u n d is c ip lin e d attachm ent to th e world as opposed to a d is c i p l i n e d under sta n d in g and i n t e l l i g e n t u t i l i z a t i o n of i t . H i l d e b e r t 's 3 , T ra n s la te d in D ickinson, op. c i t . . p p .190-191. 12 l e t t e r c o n ta in s the seeds of C h ris tia n humanism which were to be n u rtu re d by W illiam of Champeaux and h i s d i s c i p l e s , and which were to blossom w ith Hugh of St. V ic to r and h is p u p i l s . Indeed we s h a l l fin d unmistakable echoes of th e l e t t e r in the w r itin g s of Hugh, in Richard of S t. V i c t o r 's a l l e g o r y on the p arab le of the t a l e n t s , and l a t e r in the Microcosmus of Godfrey of S t. V ic to r , written a t th e end o f th e c e n tu ry . This document formed the b a s is of the Vic- to r i n e t r a d i t i o n , the t r a d i t i o n which was to make the school grow and f l o u r i s h as one o f the most s i g n i f i c a n t c e n te r s of le a rn in g and p ie ty in tw e lfth -c e n tu ry C h riste n dom. Apparently moved by the appeals of h is s tu d e n ts and by H i l d e b e r t 's e a rn e st l e t t e r , W illiam founded a t S t. V ic to r a school which would soon overshadow th e c a th e d r a l school i t s e l f . He began, as a t Notre-Dame, by te a c h in g r h e t o r i c . But h i s s p e c i a l ty was th eology. In 1113 William of Champeaux was e le c te d bishop of Chalons-sur-M arne. W illiam , who had n e v e r h im se lf taken th e t i t l e of ab b o t, l e f t the care of the community of S t. V ic to r to h is d i s c i p l e G ild u in , who l a t e r was to become i t s f i r s t abbot. W illia m 's e p isc o p a l p re d e c e sso r had died in May, 1113. 13 L a te r t h a t same y e a r, an assembly was h eld a t Ch&lons-sur- Uame which was a tte n d e d by King Louis VI, th e archbishop of Rheims, and by the bishops of S oissons, C h a rtre s, P a r is , Ifeaux, O rleans, Amiens, Auxerre, Troyes, and S e n lis . Before h is e p isc o p a l c o n s e c ra tio n , W illiam req u ested th a t th e king g ra n t a c h a r te r to th e abbey of S t. V ic to r. Thus i t was a t th i s assembly a t Chfilons in 1113 th a t S t. V ic to r of P a ris was c h a rte re d as a "ro y a l abbey." In o b ta in in g the c h a r t e r from the k in g , W illiam a ls o secured L ouis' promise t h a t th e community be allow ed f r e e l y to e l e c t i t s abbot from i t s own ■embers or from o th e r houses of the o rd e r, and th a t having made t h e i r ch o ice, they would not have to aw ait the k i n g 's consent bu t could immediately p r e s e n t t h e i r a b b o t- e le c t to the bishop o f P a ris f o r h is b le s s in g . This c h a r te r was voted upon and accepted unanim ously, w ith a l l v o tin g save W illiam , who was not y e t c o n secrated a b ish o p . Only a f t e r he had re c e iv e d the l e t t e r s p a te n t from Louis VI did he allow h im s t’ f to be co n secrated b ish o p of Chalons. S t. V ic to r was c h a rte re d as a ro y a l abbey, and i t was no t u n t i l December 1, 1114, t h a t Pope Paschal I I , a t th e re q u e st of the king o f France, issu ed the b u l l which confirmed th e abbey of S t. V ic to r. G ild u in , who up to t h a t time had h eld the t i t l e of p r i o r , now became abbot o f th e community. The usage o f th e community was A ugustin- ia n , and i t s members were now canons r e g u la r of S t. Augus t i n e . 4 4. For h i s t o r i c a l background o f th e A ugustinian Order and i t s foundations Ch. D ereine, S . J . , "Vie commune, r^ g le de S ain t-A u g u stin e t chanoines r £ g u lie r s au Xle s i e c l e , " Revue d 'h i s t o i r e e c c l e s i a s t i q u e XII (1946), num.3; a ls o 77c. D ickinson, op. c i t . , i n i r o . , c h s . I - I I , apps. I - I I . The founding of the abbey of S t. V ic to r i t s e l f is d i s cussed in F o u rie r Bonnard, H is to ir e de 1 *abbaye ro y a le e t de l ’o rd re des chanoines r^gulT era de S a in t-V ic to r de P a r is ( P a r i s , 1907), 1^1-17; see a ls o F. Hugonin, "SssaT s u r l a fo n d a tio n de l 'e c o l e de S a in t-V ic to r de P a r i s , " PL, CLXXV, 40-44. For th e l i f e of William o f Champeaux see S. Michaud, Guillaume de Champeaux e t le s eco le s de P a r is au XIIe s i e c l e d ’a p r l s des documents i n l d i t s (PaSs, 1867). For a good in tro d u c tio n to the i n t e l l e c t u a l l i f e of e le v e n th and e a r ly tw e lf th - c e n tu r y Christendom, see Helen W addell, The Wandering S ch o lars (6 th ed. New York, 1961), chs.IV -V I; the s tu d ie s o f R. L. P oole, I l l u s t r a ti o n s of the H is to r y o f Medieval Thought (London,1934X d e a l w ith the i n t e l l e c t u a l l i f e of th e p e rio d in d ep th . 15 I I THE VICTORIRE COMMUNITY The abbey of S t. V icto r was ad m in istered by men of c o n sid e ra b le i n t e l l e c t u a l a b i l i t y . The founder of th e Vic- t o r i n e community, William of Champeaux, was one of th e i n t e l l e c t u a l g ia n ts of th e age. His mentor H ild e b e rt of Lavardin was h im self a c e le b ra te d hum anist, renowned as a s c h o la r and p o e t . l The community's f i r s t abbot G ilduin e v id e n tly p os sessed g r e a t i n t e l l e c t u a l and a d m in is tr a tiv e t a l e n t s , fo r he guided S t. V ic to r through i t s f i r s t f o r ty y e a rs when th e abbey won i t s g r e a t r e p u ta tio n f o r s c h o la rs h ip and san c t i t y . That G ilduin was devoted to the promotion of C h ris t i a n le a rn in g is beyond q u e s tio n . A c lo se d i s c i p l e of William o f Champeaux, G ilduin had been among those p r e - 1. H ild e b e rt o f Lavardin ( c a . 1055-1133), born in po v erty and intended fo r the Church, f i r s t stu d ie d a t Tours. L a te r he headed th e c a th e d r a l sch o o l a t Le Mans, and in 1096 became i t s b ish o p . When William I I cap tu red Le Mans, he took H ild e b e rt to England fo r a y e a r . H ild e b e rt is known c h ie f ly f o r h i s poems and l e t t e r s . His v a rio u s E p ls- to la e — p a r t i c u l a r l y those re c o u n tin g the s tr u g g le b e tween Emperor Henry V and Pope Paschal I I — enjoyed g r s a t p o p u la r ity in the sch o o ls o f Trance and I t a l y . H il d eb e rt was an e x c e lle n t L a tin s c h o la r whose C h r i s t i a n i t y was mingled w ith C iceronian humanism. I f h i s l i t e r a r y o utlook evoked c r i t i c i s m , h is Trench and L atin sermons m erite d him a good d eal o f p r a i s e . 16 v a i l i n g upon the m aster to resume h is te a c h in g th e r e in the r e l a t i v e s o litu d e of the l e f t bank. With the e le v a tio n of William of Champeaux to the see of Ch&lons, i t was up to G ilduin as abbot to make p ro v is io n fo r f u r t h e r pedagogy. G ilduin proved to be n o t only a very ab le adm inis t r a t o r but a l e g i s l a t o r as w e ll. W e possess only a sin g le w r itin g o f the f i r s t a b b o t, bu t i t is a vory im portant doc ument indeed, the Liber 0 r d in is ,2 which s e t f o r t h the s tr u c t u r e and workings of th e V ic to rin e house. In t h i s work we fin d the l i f e of the r e l ig i o u s o f the abbey de s c rib e d in the most minute d e t a i l . The L iber O rdinia d e a ls f i r s t of a l l w ith the e le c tio n and d u tie s o f the abbot, c a r e f u l l y s p e l l i n g out the p r i v i l e g e s g ran ted the abbey by pope and kin g in the s e le c t io n of a s u p e rio r . The l e g i s l a t i v e organ o f the abbey was the c o u n c il of e l d e r s , which chose th e abbots of S t. V ic to r . I t c o n s is te d of th e p r i o r and s u b - p r io r , plus th re e or fo u r o th e r b r e t h ren chosen by th e abbot and th e c h a p te r. D ecisions of th ese e ld e r s were subm itted to th e c h a p te r f o r r a t i f i c a ti o n . This c o u n c il, to g e th e r w ith the abbot, a ls o s e le c te d th e p r i o r o f the community; an unworthy p r i o r could be r e - 2. US P a r i s , B ib lio th e * u e N ationals, L a tin 14673-14674. 17 moved from o f f i c e by J o in t a c tio n of co u n cil and c h a p te r. The p r i o r was th e a b b o t's c h ie f a s s i s ta n t * who p r e sided over th e community in the absence of the abbot and had c o n sid e ra b le r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r the i n t e r n a l workings of th e abbey. He was aided by a s u b -p r io r. Both the p r i o r and th e s u b - p r io r were members of the co u n cil; thus th e th re e p r in c ip a l o f f i c e r s of th e community served as b o th l e g i s l a t o r s and a d m in is tr a to r s . G ilduin devoted a c h a p te r of the L iber O rdinis to each of th e l e s s e r o f f i c e r s r e s p o n s ib le fo r m ain tain in g th e ab bey. Chief of th e se was the chamberlain* who had charge of a l l fu rn is h in g s and supply s t o r e s . In a d d itio n he s u p e r v ise d th e c u l t i v a t i o n of the f i e l d s . He was aid ed in the l a t t e r ta s k by a sub-cham berlain chosen from among th e con- v e r s i or lay b re th re n who a c te d as foreman of th e domain. The tr e a s u r y i t s e l f was in th e hands of th e c e lla r e r * who had charge of food p r e p a r a tio n and could a u th o r iz e p u r chases whenever n e c e s sa ry . The r e f e c t o r i a n was resp o n sib le fo r th e d in in g room. I t was h is duty to see t h a t ta b l e s were in good r e p a i r , t h a t p l a t e s and u t e n s i l s were p ro p e rly placed* and t h a t f r e s h w ater was a v a ila b le a t a l l tim es. B rethren who were i l l were cared f o r by th e in fir m a r - ia n . This canon a ls o arran g ed fo r the a n n o in tin g of th e IB s ic k and the p r e p a ra tio n of th e dead f o r b u r i a l . The a l - monar saw t h a t money and p ro v is io n s from the abbey were l i b e r a l l y d i s t r i b u t e d among the poor who liv e d in th e s u r rounding a re a . Some o f th e se u n fo rtu n a te s were in v ite d r e g u la r ly to th e abbey to p a rta k e of m eals. However a gatek eep er was n ece ssa ry to keep v a g ra n ts , v a n d a ls , and n e 'e r- d o -w e lls from d is r u p tin g the c l o i s t e r . For t h i s ta s k a p o r te r was chosen from among the c o n v e rsi. I t was not unusual fo r a ranking e c c l e s i a s t i c a l o f f i c i a l to r e t i r e to the P a ris abbey fo r a l i f e o f r e l a t i v e s o l i t u d e . Many of th e se men — c a n o n ist Stephen o f Tournai, former P a ris Bishop Maurice of S u lly , Bishop Arnoul of L isie u x — a f t e r y ears in a d m in is tr a tiv e p o s it i o n s , de lig h te d in tu rn in g once again to s t r i c t l y i n t e l l e c t u a l la b o r s . Thomas a Becket, having assumed the mantle of S t. Augustine w hile in England, sojourned a t th e V ic to rin e house f o r a s h o rt tim e, ste e p in g h im se lf in canon law. The care of th e se and o th e r v i s i t i n g d i g n i t a r i e s was arranged by th e a b b e y 's b u t l e r , a canon of g ra c io u s demeanor whose judgment and sense of p r o p r ie ty recommended him fo r the ta s k . Another v ery im portant o f f i c e r in the V ic to rin e com munity was the l i b r a r i a n . He no t only m aintained th e books in good o rd e r, b u t su p e rv ise d the copying of m anuscripts a t th e abbey. 19 F in a lly th e re were c e r t a i n o f f i c e r s whose d u tie s were d i r e c t l y r e l a t e d to the d iv in e s e r v ic e . The keeper o f vest ments cared f o r th e s a c e rd o ta l r o b e s , and the s a c r i s t a n was cu sto d ia n of th e a l t a r . The ch a n te r had charge o f th e canons in c h o ir , and s e t the tone and tempo of th e l i t u r g y . The churchwarden guarded th e door of the c h o ir, and i t was he who rang th e can o n ic a l hourB. The churchwarden along w ith th e s a c r i s t a n and a n o th e r of the b re th re n would sta y th e n ig h t in the ch ap el, by tu rn s s le e p in g and keeping v i g i l . The can o n ic a l hours ordered the d a i l y liv e s o f the Vic t o r i n e canons according to a fix e d schedule of p r a y e r. At daybreak came m a tin s, s tr u c tu r e d around the f i f t h , s ix t y - second, and e i g h ty - n in th psalm s. At nine o 'c lo c k t i e r c e was c e le b r a te d w ith psalmB and a n tip h o n s, follow ed by read ing and r e c o l l e c t i o n . The hours of se x t (noon) and none (th re e • ’clock) were observed in l i k e manner. The evening p ra y e rs — v e sp e rs and compline - - were r e c i t e d a t s i x and n in e , and c o n s is te d of psalms f o u r, s ix o r f i f t e e n , depend ing upon the season of th e e c c l e s i a s t i c a l y e a r. The tim e between th e c a n o n ic a l hours were p e rio d s of work. These p e r io d s , i f indeed we a re f o r tu n a te enough to glim pse them, a f f o r d perhaps th e most c h a r a c t e r i s t i c p ic tu re 20 of a r e l i g i o u s e s ta b lis h m e n t. At th e P a ris abbey of S t. V ic to r c o n sid e ra b le time must have been given to s c h o la rly p u r s u i t s , f o r contemporary sources a t t e s t to a b r i l l i a n t r e p u ta tio n f o r s e c u la r as w e ll as sacred le a rn in g . But i t would be f o o lis h to imagine t h a t s c h o la rs en te re d S t. V ic t o r s o le ly fcr the sake of s c h o la rs h ip ; th e prim ary motive behind the r e l ig i o u s l i f e was s a l v i f i c . I t i s e q u a lly c e r t a i n th a t not a l l of the V ic to rin e s were s c h o la rs or even wished to be. What were th e d u tie s and occupations of these canons, b e sid e s t h e i r d a ily p ra y e rs? A tw e lf th - c e n tu r y m anuscript from the A ugustinian p r io r y of B rid lin g to n sheds some l i g h t on th e problem. I t was p o s sib ly Robert, a s c rib e of B rid lin g to n , who wrote the t r e a t i s e Colloquium ro a g istri e t d i e - % c i p u l l in regulam b e a t i A ugustini de v i t a clericorum which d e s c rib e s among o th e r th in g s the manual la b o rs o f the canons: But th e re are v ery many p u r s u i t s n ece ssa ry f o r the m onastic l i f e which r e l ig i o u s c le rk s may and ought to p r a c t i s e . . . .when not a t th e c a n o n ic a l s e rv ic e s o r p r iv a te p ra y e r. Here a re some of them. Read ing, e x p la in in g or p reach in g the word of God b e fo re the b re th re n ; p r a c t i s i n g f o r d iv in e worship e i t h e r by reading or s in g in g ; p re p a rin g parchment fo r the w r i t e r s , w r i ti n g , illu m in a tin g , r u lin g l i n e s , s c o r ing m usic, c o r r e c tin g and b in d in g books; sewing new 3 . M S Oxford B odleian, L a t.T h e o l., d .1 7 , f l . l r - 9 5 v . Cited in D ickinson, op. c i t . , p . 66. 21 c lo th e s f o r th e b re th re n and r e p a ir in g old ones; making wooden spoons and c a n d le s tic k s and the li k e ; fa sh io n in g b a s k e ts , n e ts and beehives* and weaving m ats. And to come to o u tsid e p u r s u its bo th to dig and dung the garden, to la y out the garden beds, sow seeds of v e g e ta b le s and h e rb s, to p la n t and w ater v e g e ta b le s and h e rb s, trim and prune, g r a f t and move t r e e s . F urther to plough, sow, re a p , mow hay w ith a s ic k l e and make a h a y s ta c k .4 Not a l l the V ic to rin e canons a s p ire d to th e same de g re e s of holy o r d e rs . A m anuscript from the A ugustinian house of S t. Jacques, L i e g e , 5 t e l l s us t h a t some of the canons "are brought to p r i e s t l y m in is tr y , some promoted to th e o f f i c e of subdeacon, some a ls o a re reckoned in the o r d e r of a c o ly te s , e x o r c i s t , doorkeeper, and r e a d e r ..." ® But not a l l of th e canons en te re d even the low est o rd ers of th e c le r g y . Some p r e fe r r e d to remain laymen. These were th e c o n v ersi who performed th e heavy a g r i c u l t u r a l la b o r and c e r t a i n o th e r ta s k s a t the abbpy. Indeed the L iber O rdinls s t i p u l a t e s t h a t th e sub-cham berlain and th e p o r t e r of the community be chosen from among th e se lay b re th re n . The V ic to rin e i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of th e A ugustinian Buie 4. I b i d . , f o .7 6 r - v , t r a n s l a t e d in D ickinson, o p . c i t . , p . 193. 5. IIS London B r i t i s h Museum, Add.21,244. Also in PL,CCXIII, 807-850. This is the L iber de d i v e r s i s o rd in ib u s e t pro- f e s s io n ib u s qui su n t in e c c l e s i a . According to Dickinson i t was w r i t t e n probably 1125-1130 by Raimbaud o f Li&ge. 6. Op. c i t . . PL>CCXIII,829 22 tended to be more s t r i c t than the o th er o rd ers of i t s day, save only the P re m o n stra te n sia n s. O rig in a lly the canons were rig o ro u s v e g e ta r ia n s . At the end of the tw e lf th cen-.- tu ry t h i s was re la x e d somewhat, when Abbot Absalon allow ed the b re th re n to p a rta k e of meat on c e r t a i n f e a s td a y s . V er minous c lo th in g was not co n sid ered a sure sig n of s a n c t i t y . The V ic to rin e canons wore long cassocks lin e d w ith sheep sk in a g a in s t the cold w in te rs of n o rth e rn Europe. Over th is a w hite s u r p lic e and amice were worn. The garb was com p le te d w ith a black-hooded cope, which became th e d i s t i n g u ish in g mark of th e o rd e r. Abbot G uilduin was a g r e a t refo rm er, zealous f o r the A ugustinian Rule. Under his guidance the P a r is abbey of S t. V ic to r soon became head of an order which oonvened i t s own g e n e ra l c h a p te r s . The d ate in which t h i s p r a c t i c e b e gan is u n c e r ta in , b u t we do know t h a t i t was w e ll b efo re 1139, f o r in t h a t y e a r th e old abbey of S t. V incent a t Sen- l i s adopted the V ic to r in e u sag e, and promised the P a ris community t h a t t h e i r abbot would "a tte n d your g e n e ra l chap t e r every y e a r t h a t th e r e w ith the r e s t he may c o n sid e r th e s t a t e and p ro g re ss of th e o r d e r . F r o m 1130 on v a rio u s French bishops began drawing on the community* "im porting" 7. Bonnard, Op. c i t . , 1,147-148* n .5 | c i t e d and t r a n s l a t e d in D ickinson, c i t . , p . 85. 23 the canons r e g u la r and s u b s t i t u t i n g them fo r th e s e c u la rs of th e c a t h e d r a l s . Numerous r e l ig i o u s houses req u ested abbots and canons from S t. V ic to r to reform t h e i r r u l e . Among th„ f i r s t , i r o n i c a l l y , was S t. Genevieve in P a r is , re c e n t san ctu ary of P e te r A belard. The need f o r reform of th e s e c u la r c h a p te r th e re was seen by Louis VII and by Pope Eugenius I I I , who had decided t e n t a t i v e l y to tu rn S t. Genevieve in to a Ben e d ic tin e abbey. The canons r e s i s t e d , and the pope looked to th e V ic to rin e s fo r a i d . Abbot G llduin e v e n tu a lly d e c id ed to s e n t twelve canons and h is p r i o r , Odo of St. V ic to r , who was I n s t a l l e d as abbot of the mearby e sta b lish m e n t in in 1148. U n fo rtu n a te ly the new abbot met w ith such opp o si tio n t h a t he resig n ed seven y ears l a t e r and re tu rn e d to S t. V ic to r . However h is su c c e sso r was a V ic to r in e , and complete reform of the famous old abbey f i n a l l y was e f f e c te d w ith th e e x p u lsio n of some of the more r e c a l c i t r a n t of th e o r i g i n a l s e c u l a r s . The V ic to rin e Order soon bad daughter houses s c a tte re d throughout Europe. Raoul o f S t. V ic to r became abbot of the church o f S t. S atu r in the dio cese of Bourges. Roger be came abbot of S t. Euverte a t O rleans, w h ile a n o th e r Roger of S t. V ic to r was i n s t a l l e d a t Eu in Normandy. G arnier be came abbot o f S t . Barthelemy* n ear Noyon. And b e fo re 1139 24 th e canons of S t. V incent a t S e n lis had reformed t h e i r r u l e , i n s t a l l i n g Beaudoin of S t. V ic to r as t h e i r abbot. G uibert became abbot of S t. Marie a t Eaucourt, and Richard of S t, V ic to r — not to be confused w ith h is more famous namesake — was i n s t a l l e d a t th e abbey of S t. Augustine in B r i s t o l . Many V ic to r in e houses were soon to sp rin g up in England: a t W aterford, Wormesley, Worspring, Keynsham, and S ta v o rd a le . In Dublin was e s ta b lis h e d the Victorine house of S t. Thomas, and in Wales the abbey of Wigmore sought the guidance of th e c e le b r a te d sc h o la r Andrew of S t. V ic to r. Even in N aples, the congregation of S t . P e te r was based on th e usage of the P a r is abbey. The example s e t by the C arth u sian s and the monks of cfteau x e x e rte d no sm all in flu e n c e on th e canons r e g u la r . For a long time v a rio u s houses of A ugustinian canons had e x iste d independently and fu n ctio n e d merely as p a r t o f the normal d io cesan a p p a ra tu s . S i g n i f i c a n t l y i t was Pope Eu- genius I I I — a C is te r c ia n — who a l t e r e d t h i s , p ro v id in g in a b u l l of 1145 t h a t problems a r i s i n g w ith in th e Augus t i n i a n o rd e r should be s e t t l e d by th e s u p e rio rs m eeting in c o u n c il, and su g g e stin g annual g e n e ra l c h a p te r m eetings s im ila r to th o se h e ld by the C iste rc ia n s.® 8 . Dickinson, Op. c i t . , p . 81. 25 W e can d e te c t t h i s m onastic in flu en c e in the r e l a t i o n sh ip between the P a ris abbey of S t. V ic to r and h e r daughter houses. The head of the P a ris house is c a lle d th e "abbot" r a t h e r than th e p ra e p o s itu s or c an o n ica. 9 Unlike the d aughter houses of Cluny which had been headed by a " p rio r" r e s p o n s ib le to the one abbot of th e mother house, each V ic t o r i n e e sta b lish m e n t was d ir e c te d by i t s own ab b o t. The abbot in P a r i s , w hile enjoying c o n sid e ra b le p r e s t i g e , was merely primus i n t e r p a r e s . Each V ic to rin e house a ls o had a p r i o r , who was c h ie f a s s i s t a n t to th e ab b o t. Of course the c e n t r a l house a t P a ris had the t i t l e of "abbey," but so did many o th e r houses of A ugustinian canons in n o rth e rn Prance. The L ib er O rdinie gave th e abbot c o n sid e ra b le leeway in th e a d m in is tr a tio n o f the community o f canons. P a t t e r s such as th e school were l e f t e n t i r e l y to h is d i s c r e t i o n . This f l e x i b i l i t y would enable an abbot such as G ilduin to devote much of h is energy to the school and an abbot such as Achard or E rv ise to d is r e g a r d i t com pletely. I t was G ilduin who go t the school underway. The abbot decided to put h i s c h ie f a s s i s t a n t , P r io r Thomas, in charge of C h r is tia n le a r n in g . The f a c t t h a t the abbey and the school were ad m in iste re d by c lo se companions — G ilduin and 9. Dickinson, Op. c i t . , p . 80. 26 Thomas — was im portant f o r th e unhindered development of bo th i n s t i t u t i o n s . P r io r Thomas was succeeded in 1133 by an o th er f r ie n d and p ro te g £ of W illiam of Champeaux, Odo (or Eudes) o f S t. V ic to r, an ab le a d m in is tr a to r whose l i t t l e e p i s t l e s on obedience are e x t a n t . 10 I t was to Odo t h a t G ilduin en tr u s t e d the arduous ta s k of reform ing the neighboring abbey o f S t. Genevieve. The sc h o la r Andrew was the next p r i o r , a lth o u g h he held o f f i c e only s e v e ra l months. N an tier — a t h i r d disciple of the founder — succeeded Andrew as p r i o r of S t. V ic to r in 1148. N a n tie r, the l a s t of the o r i g i n a l V ic to r in e s , serv ed fo u rte e n y e a rs as p r i o r of th e a b b e y .11 With G ild u in ’s d e a th in 1155 th e a d m in is tra tio n o f the abbey underwent a c r u c i a l change. The new abbot, Achard of S t. V ic to r , was a renowned th e o lo g ia n who a lso enjoyed con s id e r a b le s o c ia l p r e s t i g e . But as abbot he had no d i r e c t i n t e r e s t in th e abbey school as had h is p red ecesso r G ild u in , th e s c h o o l's fb u n d er. His c h ie f concern was the c h r i s t o l o - g i c a l b a t t l e over th e H y p o static Union, an im portant ques t io n to be s u re , but one which absorbed a l l of th e abbot*s 10. PL,GXCVI, 1 3 9 9 ff, 11. In 1162 N a n tie r was e le c te d abbot of th e community, and he d ie d only s ix months l a t e r . 27 i n t e l l e c t u a l e n e rg ie s. Indeed, we may w ell ask how much enthusiasm Achard a c t u a l l y had f o r s e c u la r le a r n in g . For a f t e r h is appointm ent to the ep isc o p a l see o f Avranches in 1162, r a t h e r than seeking to spread V ic to rin e in flu e n c e , Achard tu rn ed to th e s t r i c t e r order o f Premontre, founding a Norbertine^-2 abbey in Lucerne. I t was h ere by h is r e q u est t h a t h is remains were l a i d to r e s t in 1171. In the decade fo llow ing th e e l e c t i o n o f Abbot E rv ise in 1162 th e power, i f not the a u t h o r i t y , of the p r i o r was in c re a s e d . D isg ru n tled w ith th e a d m in is tr a tio n of an un worthy ab b o t, th e ch ap ter led by P r io r Richard appealed d i r e c t l y to th e pope. E v e n tu a lly the abbot was deposed. This a p p a re n tly enhanced the p o s itio n of the p r i o r in r e l a t io n to h i s a b b o t. For s c a rc e ly a decade l a t e r P r io r Wal t e r was e x e r tin g a r a t h e r heavy-handed in flu e n c e on th e community under th e very nose of Abbot Guerin who was seem in g ly pow erless to r e s t r a i n h is zealous a s s i s t a n t . P er s o n a li t y had much to do w ith th e s i t u a t i o n . Guerin was un doubtedly m ild of manner, and was h e s i t a n t to a s s e r t h is a u t h o r i t y . W a lte r's temperament on th e o th e r hand was de- 12. The N o rb ertin e canons took t h e i r name from S t. N orbert ( c a . 1080-1134), a w ealthy convert who, upon e n te r in g th e p rie s th o o d , gave away h i s w orldly goods and r e t i r e d to Pr£montr6. There he founded an order o f can ons r e g u la r . They were c a lle d "Horbertines "or 'Presaionstra- t e n s l a n s . 28 c id e d ly le o n in e . Furthermore he had served as R ic h a rd 's s u b -p rio r during the f ig h t to remove Ervi.se, and was h ard ly one to q u a il b e fo re an a b b o t, p a r t i c u l a r l y a so ft-sp o k en one. P r io r W alter, alth o u g h head of the School o f S t. Vic t o r , was q u ite opposed to s e c u la r le a r n in g , and e v id e n tly was su sp ic io u s of sacred s tu d ie s as w e ll. This a t t i t u d e , along w ith h i s cantankerous p e r s o n a lity and the tendancy to ty ra n n iz e Abbot G uerin, s e r io u s ly je o p a rd iz e d th e school. And i t was W a lte r 's h o s t i l i t y towards C h r is tia n humanism t h a t did so much to obscure th e "Hugonian" t r a d i t i o n a t S t. V ic to r. Thus i t can be seen th a t the in te r p la y of p e r s o n a litie s w ith in the a d m in is tr a tiv e h ie ra rc h y of the V ic to rin e com munity was to have a s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on the School o f S t. V ic to r. I t was in la rg e p a r t re sp o n s ib le f o r th e e r roneous i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of th e "Hugonian" t r a d i t i o n as one of m ysticism , w hile th e stro n g element of C h ris tia n human ism a t the abbey was f o r c e n tu r ie s ig n o red . 29 III THK SCHOOL AT ST. VICTOR Abbot G ilduin p laced a g r e a t deal of emphasis upon the form ation of n o v ic e s. The only "school" which he mentions e x p l i c i t l y in the Liber O rdinis i s the s c o la n o v itio ru m » where th e new canons were in tro d u ced to the usages of the abbey. I t was a t t h i s time th a t they were tr a in e d in the p r a c t i c e of l e c t i o » to p rep are them f o r th e c e le b r a tio n of th e l i t u r g i c a l o f f i c e s which re q u ire d them to read . But the s c o la n o vitiorum was not the c e le b ra te d "School o f S t. V ic to r" which a t t r a c t e d s c h o la rs from a l l co rn ers of Christendom. P acts about t h i s school are more e lu s iv e . Perhaps the most in fo rm ativ e s e c tio n o f th e L iber O rdinis f o r our purposes is th e long c h a p te r d e s c rib in g the fu n c ti o n of the l i b r a r i a n . I t was h is duty t o see t h a t th e books were c a r e f u l l y m aintained on t h e i r wooden ra c k s , w ell- p r o te c te d from the e f f e c t s of hum idity. He was a ls o respon> s i b l e fo r com piling a catalogue of the l i b r a r y , f o r n o tin g in a s p e c ia l r e g i s t e r th e volumes borrowed and se e in g to t h e i r r e t u r n , and f o r u n d ertak in g a p e r io d ic c le a n in g of a l l books in th e c o l l e c t i o n . The l i b r a r i a n was a ls o re s p o n s ib le f o r e n ric h in g the 30 c o lle c tio n * and to t h i s end he d i s t r i b u t e d the a p p ro p ria te m a te r ia ls to the copyists* who came both from o u tsid e and w ith in th e abbey. No canon could receiv e w r itin g m a te r ia ls — parchment and ink — w ith o u t the perm ission of the abbot. Thus we le a rn from the Liber O rdinis th a t the abbot of S t. V ic to r e x e rc ise d d i r e c t c o n tro l over the l i t e r a r y output of th e community. Only those whom the abbot Judged to be fully capable could undertake a p e rso n a l p r o je c t . Probably the f i r s t o b je c t o f the c o p y ists was to repro- duce the l i t u r g i c a l books used by the e n t i r e community. However* the l i b r a r i a n a ls o had to produce books s u i t a b l e f o r two kinds of i n s t r u c t i o n , d escrib ed in g r e a t d e t a i l in G ild u in 's document: p r iv a te read in g and p u b lic read in g . At the School of S t. V ic to r , knowledge was im parted in th re e ways: in le ss o n s p ro p e r, in p r iv a te rea d in g , and in th e l e c t i o d iv in a o r p u b lic re a d in g . I t is im portant to r e a l i z e th a t th e r e were no sharp d iv is io n s between c l a s s room, ch ap el, and c l o i s t e r . The te a c h e rs were a c tiv e in a l l th r e e . Thus we see in the pedagogical l i t e r a t u r e the teac h in g s of men who were b o th p ro fe s so rs and p re a c h e rs. In the d a ily hours of th e monastery much time was de voted to p r iv a te re a d in g . This was done in the s ile n c e o f th e c l o i s t e r . That s ile n c e was r e l a t i v e however, fo r th e 31 L iber O rdinie makes I t c l e a r th a t p r iv a te reading could be accomplished by sm all groups of canons* thus en ab lin g the b r e th re n a f f l i c t e d w ith poor ey esig h t to b e n e f it by the read in g o f those whose eyes were s tr o n g e r . These semi p r iv a te read in g s probably provided the in s p i r a t i o n f o r th e v ario u s l i t t l e th e o lo g ic a l and p h ilo so p h ic a l w r itin g s ap p e a rin g in d ialo g u e form which we fin d , fo r example, in th e works of Hugh of S t. V ic to r. Of equal importance were th e p u b lic re a d in g s. In a lengthy c h a p te r d e a lin g w ith proper conduct in the r e f e c to r y , Abbot G ilduin d e sc rib e d the annual read in g program. During Advent, i t c o n s is te d of s e le c tio n s from the twelve P ro p h e ts, sermons on the Advent, and s p e c i f i c a l l y th e s e r mons of Origen on th e Psalms. During C h ristm a s tid e , com m en ta rie s on th e Gospels and a p p ro p ria te sermons were to be read to th e b r e th r e n . Prom the octave of Epiphany u n t i l Septuagesim a, S t. A u g u stin e 's e x p o s itio n s of the P s a l t e r were read , and thence through Quinquagesima th e h i s t o r i c a l books up to Kings along w ith Origen’s h o m ilies on them and h is e x p o s itio n s of th e E v a n g e lis ts . During Lent, th e com m unity heard th e Prophet Jerem iah, and a s iz e a b le p o rtio n of S t. A u g u stin e ’s w ritin g s — h is e x p o s itio n of th e Lamen t a t i o n s as w e ll as h is commentary and sermons on the Lord’ s p a s sio n . Homilies and e x p o s itio n s of the E v a n g e lis ts were 32 read during E a s t e r t i d e , to g e th e r w ith A ugustine's commen t a r y on the f i r s t e p i s t l e of S t. John, and from the E a s te r octave u n t i l the f e a s t of the Ascension, the Apocalypse and the E p is tle s were read from the New Testament. The Acts of th e A postles were heard u n t i l P e n te c o st, and a f t e r th a t v a rio u s commentaries and sermons on the Gospels and Epistles. The long s t r e t c h of time from the P en te c o st octave un t i l Advent was f i l l e d w ith a v a r i e t y of re a d in g s; the books of Kings, to g e th e r w ith O rigen's h o m ilie s; then Judges; then Solomon's P ro v erb s, Wisdom and E c c l e s i a s t e s . A fter t h i s the le sso n was on Job and of course included G regory's M o ra lia . Following t h i s were Tobias, E s th e r , J u d ith , and E sdras. These read in g s c a r r ie d the community into October, when they tu rn e d once again to th e E v a n g e lis ts . F in a lly , from e a r ly November u n t i l Advent, they read E z ech iel and D aniel, along w ith a p p ro p ria te commentaries. Although t h i s schedule would appear to be r a t h e r rig id ly o rg an ized , th e Liber O rdinis makes i t c l e a r th a t the monk in charge of the r e f e c t o r y had a c e r ta in amount of l e e way in the choice of th e sermons to be road. He had only to choose h o m ilies t h a t would be in keeping w ith the season of th e l i t u r g i c a l y e a r or w ith th e p a r t i c u l a r fe a std a y being c e le b r a te d . The r e f e c t o r i a n th u s worked in close c o l l a b o r a t i o n w ith the l i b r a r i a n of th e abbey. The need fo r m ater- 33 i a l a f o r the p u b lic read in g in the re fe c to r y no t only f a vored th e t r a n s c r i p t i o n o f a n c ie n t a u th o rs , b u t i t a lso seemed to have been a t th e ro o t o f much of th e o r ig i n a l l i t e ra ry a c t i v i t y a t the abbey of S t. V ic to r. As to th e t h i r d means o f i n s tr u c tio n — le sso n s proper in the v a rio u s d i s c i p l i n e s of th e a r t s — th e L iber O rdinis t e l l s us n o th in g . G ilduin does t e l l us th a t th e p r i o r of th e abbey o f f i c i a l l y headed the sc h o o l. Follow ing G ilduin in t h i s p o s itio n in 1114 was b ro th e r Thomas, who had charge of i n s t r u c t i o n a t S t. V ic to r u n t i l h is martyrdom in 1133.* The only V ic to rin e document we possess concerning the school i t s e l f was a t r a c t w r i tt e n by Hugh of S t. V ic to r , De v a n i t a t e mundl,2 in which Hugh d e sc rib e s the abbey sch o o l. The p u p ils were div id ed in to groups. Each group was v a r i ously occupied w ith th e triv iu m or the quadrivium . In ad d i t i o n , the s tu d e n ts were in s tr u c te d in manuscript illum ina tio n and in the a r t of m edicine. This l a t t e r is p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r e s t i n g when we note t h a t the p e rso n a l p h y sic ia n of Louis VI, a d o c to r named Obizo, had been re c e iv e d in to v a n i t a t e mundi, PL, CLXXVI, 703-740. 2. Thomas, a ls o c o n fe sso r to P a r is Bishop Stephen o f S e n ile , was murdered by the nephew o f the c a th e d r a l archdeacon, whom he had often reproached fo r simony and f o r o v e rs te p ping the bounds of h i s j u r i s d i c t i o n . P r io r Thomas died in th e arms o f th e b ish o p , who had t r i e d t o p r o te c t him. 34 the V ic to rin e community as a canon. I t was Obizo o f S t. V ic to r whose knowledge and p ro fic ie n c y made i t p o s s ib le f o r th e m edical a r t s to be ta u g h t a t the abbey s c h o o l.3 To a s c e r t a i n p r e c is e ly the cu rricu lu m o f the School o f S t. V ic to r and th e a u t h o r i t i e s c o n su lte d , we must look once again to Master Hugh. In h is D id ascalico n de stu d io le g e n d !4 Hugh c a r e f u l l y i n s t r u c t s the s tu d e n ts as to which s u b je c ts should be m astered and which a u t h o r i t i e s ought to be c o n su lte d . Equally im portant is the f a c t th a t he s e ts f o r t h the o rd e r in which th e v a rio u s books a re to be read . In th e D id ascalico n we fin d th a t knowledge has been su bdivided in to v a rio u s c a te g o r ie s which f a l l in to two major c l a s s i f i c a t i o n s ! t h e o r e t i c a l and p r a c t i c a l . M aster 3 . O ab riel Naudaeus, De A n tiq u ita te e t d i g n l t a t e scholae a e d ic a e p a r i s i e n s i s ( P a r i s , 16&8), pp. 23, 32-33, 1^5. See a ls o A lfre d F ra n k lin , H i s to i r e de l a Bibliothfeque de l'a b b a y e de S a in t- V ic to r d P aris~T P a r i s . 1865). Trariklin c i t e s the V ic io rin e ”Necrology i t s e l f , and t e l l s us t h a t Obizo brought w ith him to th e abbey soae books of th e Old and New Testament w ith comma t a r i e s . These volumes he was to bequeath to th e l i b r a r y a t S t. V ic to r . Obizo of S t. V ic to r — p h y s ic ia n , te a c h e r , and canon — - d ie d in m id -tw e lfth cen tu ry . 4. D id ascalico n de s tu d io le g e n d i , PL, CLXXVI, 741-838$ In p re p a rin g t h i s stu d y I have used th e e d itio n of Jeroae T ay lo r, The D id ascalico n of Hugh of S t. V i c t o r , t r a n s la t e d and annotatedi by Jerome Taylor"TNew York, 1961). 35 Hugh set f o r t h the v a rio u s d i s c i p l i n e s as follows* PHILOSOPHY f Theology T h e o re tic a l-I P hysics /-Arithmetic '•M athem aticsG eom etry I Astronomy '•Music • P r a c t i c a l »M echanical Logical ^ S o lita ry (e th ic s ) -^Private (economics) (•Public ( p o l i t i c s ) Fabric-m aking Armament Coznmeroe A g ric u ltu re Hunting Medicine '-T h eatrics rGrammar 1 r Demon s t ra t i on Arguments Bribable argument-rRhetoric '■Sophistic D ialectic Of a l l th e se sc ie n c e s seven have t r a d i t i o n a l l y been co n sid ered to excel th e r e s t . These seven — the triv iu m (gram mar, r h e t o r i c , d i a l e c t i c ) and th e quadrivium ( a r ith m e tic , geom etry, astronomy music) — were to be m astered by those who would be educated . Each d i s c i p l i n e had i t s a n c ie n t a u t h o r it y . These a u th o r i t i e s may have been Roman or Greek sa v a n ts, Old T esta ment personages or in some cases even c h a ra c te rs from c l a s s i c a l mythology and th e o r i e n t a l m ysterieB , such as Mercury or E le u s is . Among the a n c ie n t a u t h o r i t i e s in the t h e o r e t i c a l d i s c i - 35 p lin e s were Nichomachus5 and P y th a g o ra s.6 The l a t t e r ' s Matentetradem d e a lt w ith the te a c h in g of the quadrivium . 7 Pythagoras was a lso regarded as an a u t h o r it y on m usic, as were Linus, Z etus, and Amphio.® Beometry was known through B oethius, who was thought to have t r a n s l a t e d th e books of E u c lid . As f o r astronomy, th ere was disagreem ent as to whether th e o r ig i n a l a u t h o r i t i e s were the Hebrews or the E g y p tian s. Macrobius had s a id th a t the Egyptians were the f i r s t purveyors of the a r t . But Cassiodorus, I s id o r e , and Rhabanus Maurus, fo llow ing Josephus, c re d ite d the Hebrews — Abraham in p a r t i c u l a r — w ith f i r s t having in s tr u c te d th e Egyptians in astronomy. Hugh c i t e s Ptolem y's Ganones b u t t e l l s us merely th a t Ptolemy "revived" astronomy. As f o r the t r i v i u a of p r a c t i c a l d i s c i p l i n e s , grammar was f i r s t founded in Egypt in the time of O s ir is .^ The 5. Hugh quotes I s id o r e , Etym ologise 1 11,1,1. 6. Here, according to J. T a y lo r, Op. c i t . p . 208 n .8 , Hugh is quoting a w ritin g o f Remigius o f Auxerre on M artianus C a p e lla 's De n u p t i i s P h ilo lo g ia e e t M ercuril I I , c v i i (Taylor ciTes DlcJc e d i t i o n , p . 44). Taylor c i t e s the w r itin g of Remigius as M S P a r is Bibliothfeque N ationale 14754,f o l , 1 8 r : "tyii ^ y t h a g o r a s 7 n°n t a c u i t m a th e n te tra - dea, id e s t doctrinam q u a t e r n a r i a a . . . " 7. Again Hugh quotes Remigius, M S c i t . , fo l.l7 r« Y . 8. Hugh quotes I s i d o r e , Etym ologise I I I , x r i , l ; I I I , x x i l , 6 . 9. M artianus, De n u p t i i s IV,cccxxx (Dick e d .,p .l5 3 ) 37 a u t h o r i t i e s to "be s tu d ie s were Donatus — s p e c i f i c a l l y the Ara minor and the t h i r d p a r t of th e Ars m a jo r, along w ith S e rv iu s ' commentary — and P r ia c ia n , whose t r e a t i s e s Con cern in g Accents and Concerning the Twelve Books of V e rg il a re c i t e d . The s tu d e n ts a lso c o n su lted I s i d o r e 's Etymolo g i e s . D i a l e c t i c , says Hugh, was f i r s t founded by Parmeni des. *0 S o c ra te s, P la to , and A r i s t o t l e expanded and p e r fe c te d th e a r t . He mentions C ic e ro 's Topics and c i t e s Varro as a t r a n s l a t o r of works on d i a l e c t i c . Demosthenes f i r s t devised r h e t o r i c among the Greeks, and T is ia s among the Romans, w hile Corax in troduced i t in Syracuse. A r i s t o t l e , G orgias, and Hermagoras developed Greek r h e t o r i c , and t h e i r refin em en ts were brought in to L atin by C icero, Q u in tilia n , and T i t i a n . L ite r a tu r e — poems, p la y s , h i s t o r i e s — Hugh regarded as an appendage to the a r t s , and only t a n g e n t i a l to p h i l o sophy. These w ritin g s should be read only a f t e r th e seven l i b e r a l a r t s have been m astered. This view was decid ed ly opposed to th e p r e v a i l in g a t t i t u d e a t the school of Chartres where l i t e r a t u r e was stu d ie d as a means o f le a rn in g grammar. 10. According to T aylor, Op. c i t . , p,211 n .3 5 , t h i s i s ad ap ted from M artianus C ap e lla, De n u p t i i s IV.cccxxx and from a Remigius g lo ss on th e t e x t . See Raymond K liban- sky, "The Rock o f Parse n id e s : Mediaeval Views on th e O rigin of D i a l e c t i c , " Medieval and Renaissance S tu d ies I (1941-1943), 178-186. ” 38 Bernard of C h a rtre s, d e sc rib e d as "th e moat copious fount of l i t e r a r y study in Gaul, N H tau g h t grammar by means of commentary on jroetry and p ro se . Moreover he f e l t t h a t h i s t o r i e s should be read and s tu d ie d d i l i g e n t l y . There was thus a fundamental d iff e r e n c e between the schools of S t. V ic to r and C hartres w ith reg ard to the te a c h in g of grammar. P u p ils a t S t. V ic to r le a rn e d by reading te c h n ic a l t r e a t ments of th e a r t , whreas a t C h artres l i t e r a t u r e was stressed so t h a t th e p u p il le a rn e d grammar b£ maans of the a r t . The culm ination of i n s t r u c t i o n in the a r t s a t the School of S t. V ic to r was the u n d erstan d in g of Sacred S c rip t u r e . F i r s t of a l l , the stu d e n t had to m aster th e h is t o r y s e t f o r t h in the B ib le . "Learn e v e ry th in g ," co u n selle d Hugh. "Wothing is s u p e rf lu o u s ." Eleven books were to be s tu d ie d f o r a mastery of Bible h i s t o r y : G enesis, Exodus, Josue, Judges, Kings, C h ro n ic le s, the fo u r Gospels, and the book of A cts, lugh did not r e s t r i c t the h i s t o r i c a l sense of S c rip tu re to the re c o u n tin g of a c tu a l deeds done. He a la o used th e term " h i s t o r i c a l " to d e sig n a te the l i t e r a l sense of d iv in e u t t e r a n c e . Most p a r ts of Holy W rit, how e v e r, are s u b je c t to a d eeper i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Thus Hugh emphasized to h is p u p ils th e th re e le v e ls a t which S c rip - 11. By John of S a lis b u ry , M etalogicon I , x x iv . PL, CXCIX, 854. 39 tu r e may be u n d ersto o d : h i s t o r i c a l * a lle g o r ic a l* and tro p o - l o g i c a l . In th e a l l e g o r i c a l sen se, v i s i b l e th in g s a re employed throughout S c r ip tu r e to i l l u s t r a t e i n v i s i b l e th in g s , the m y ste rie s of the F a ith . As h i s t o r i c a l o r l i t e r a l un d er s ta n d in g p ro v id e s the fo undation fo r knowledge of the Bible* so a l l e g o r i c a l u n d erstan d in g fu rn is h e s the su p e r s t r u c t u r e . The S c r ip tu r e s co n sid ered most a p p ro p ria te f o r a l l e g o r i c a l study were th e Gospels o f Matthew and John, th e E p i s t l e s — e s p e c ia lly th o se of Paul — and th e Apocalypse. Then the stu d e n t was to proceed to the Hexaemeron, th e l a s t th re e books of the P entateuch on the m y ste rie s o f the law, I s a i a s , th e b eginning and end of E z e c h ie l, Job, Psalm s, and th e C a n tic le of C a n tic le s . The t h i r d sense o f S c rip tu re a f t e r th e h i s t o r i c a l and a l l e g o r i c a l is th e tr o p o l o g i c a l u n d e rsta n d in g , by which v a rio u s moral le ss o n s may be g leaned from the d iv in e u t te r a n c e s . The e n t i r e b i b l i c a l corpus could p r o f i t a b l y be s tu d ie d f o r purposes of tro p o lo g y . In a d d itio n to th e reading of Holy W rit, the p u p ils a t S t. V ic to r had to study the c h ie f p a t r i s t i c a u t h o r i t i e s on S c r ip t u r e , j u s t as they had s tu d ie d the pagan a u t h o r i t i e s on th e a r t s . F i r s t and forem ost among th e C h ristia n a u th - 40 o r i t i e s was S t. A ugustine, whose w r itin g s were emphasized a t the abhey sc h o o l. S t. Jerom e's w ritin g s a ls o receiv ed a good d eal o f a t t e n t i o n . He was regarded as perhaps the prim ary a u th o r ity on the P rophets, e s p e c ia lly I s a ia s and E z e c h ie l. A good many of O rig en 's works were used f o r p u r poses of i n s t r u c t i o n , a l b e i t w ith some c a u tio n . The w r i t ings of Pseudo-Dionysius e x e rc ise d a f a i r degree of i n f l u ence a t S t. V ic to r , p a r t i c u l a r l y in the l a t e r p a r t of th e cen tu ry . Among the o th e r a u t h o r i t i e s co n su lte d on th e S c rip tu re s were A thanasius, Ambrose, H ila ry of P o i t i e r s , B a sil and Gregory, John Chrysostom, Gregory of Hyssa, C y ril, Pope Leo, Cyprian, P ro c liu s (not the pagan, bu t th e bishop of C o n sta n tin o p le , d .4 4 6 ), P ro sp er, O rosius, I s id o r e , Bede, and G e la s iu s. In a d d itio n , S e d u liu s, P ru d e n tiu s, Juvencus, and A rato r were used in v ary in g degrees as they proved u se f u l f o r i n s t r u c t i o n . Some o f the works of Eusebius were s tu d ie d , w ith r e s e r v a tio n s . But th e school r e j e c t e d a l l o f R u fin u s' w r itin g s , because S t. Jerome had censured h is posi» t io n on th e freedom of the w i l l . This then was th e course of study a t th e abbey School o f S t. V ic to r . F i r s t the p u p il was schooled in th e l i b e r a l a r t s . Along w ith h is lesso n s he re c e iv e d inform al i n s t r u c tio n in th e S c r ip tu r e s v ia th e l e c t i o d iv in a and was en- 41 couraged to study B ib le h is to r y p r i v a t e l y . When he had achieved a reasonable competence in the triv iu m and q u a d r i- vium, th e p u p il receiv ed formal i n s t r u c t i o n in th eology. W e a re indeed f o rtu n a te to have an e x ta n t source which s p e c i f i c a l l y d e s c rib e s Hugh's te a c h in g a t the sch o o l. This source i s the n a n u s c rip t w r itte n by a stu d e n t a t the School of S t. V i c t o r , Laurence o f W e stm in ster,3,2 whose r e p o rts on Hugh's l e c tu r e s were c o rre c te d each week by th e m aster him s e l f . These r e p o rts c l e a r l y in d ic a te t h a t e n t h u s i a s t i c s tu d e n ts from o u tsid e th e abbey came to hear Hugh's l e c t u r e s . Among th e se were P e te r Lombard, P e te r Comestor, and Robert of Melun. Prom L au ren ce's m an u sc rip t, we gain some in s ig h t in to the p e rso n a l r e l a t io n s h i p s re sp o n s ib le fo r the ra p id d if f u s io n o f Hugh's te a c h in g . Guided by th e a b i l i t i e s of G ild u in , Thomas, and Hugh, the School of S t. V ic to r made tremendods s t r i d e s . I t was an open sc h o o l, th a t i s , i t was no t r e s t r i c t e d to canons. Students flo c k ed th e r e , a t t r a c t e d not only by the te a c h in g but by the h o lin e s s of the p la c e . I t s r e g u la r h o u rs, i t s r u le of c l a u s t r a l s ile n c e and i t s s im p lic ity helped produce b o th good r e l ig i o u s and good s tu d e n ts . 12. US B resla u Rehdigeranus 61, f o .l 3 3 r ; a l s o , M S Oxford, Laudianus m isc. 344, fo .4 1 v -4 2 r. See Appendix I . 42 The philosophy u n d e rly in g the School o f S t. V ic to r was s t a t e d q u ite c l e a r l y by m aster Hugh in h is De i n s t i t u t i o n e n o v itio ru m i "The road which you should follow is t h a t of le a r n in g , of d i s c i p l i n e , and of goodness. le a rn in g lead s to d i s c i p l i n e , d i s c i p l i n e lead s to goodness, and th a t le a d s to b le s s e d n e s s ."13 13. T ra n sla te d by E. Michaud, G u illa ume de Champeaux e t le s eco les de P a ris ( P a r is , 1867), p . 346. 43 IV HUGH OP ST. VICTOR The q u e s tio n of Hugh's o r ig in has given r i s e to much co n tro v ersy b u t has never been s a t i s f a c t o r i l y answered. There a re e s s e n t i a l l y th re e th e o r ie s as to the b i r t h p l a c e of the famous V ic to rin e — Saxony, F la n d e rs, and L orraine — and each a re a has i t s e n t h u s i a s t i c p a r t is a n s . The Saxon th eo ry f i r s t appears in the Chronica of A lberic de T r o is - P o n ta in e s , only a cen tu ry a f t e r Hugh.l While t h i s opinion is found a lso in other e a rly w r i t e r s , i t does not appear b e fo re the t h i r t e e n t h cen tu ry . This does, however, seem to be the opinion a t S t. V ic to r i t s e l f . The e p ita p h o f Hugh bore the i n s c r i p t i o n : "Hugo sub hoc saxo j a c u i t v i r o rig in e S ax o .”2 The th e o ry of Hugh's Saxon o r ig in was em bellished by l a t e r te s tim o n ie s , according to which he was born a t Har- tingham in th e Harz, son o f Count Conrad of Blankenburg. This t h e s i s was developed in the e ig h te e n th cen tu ry by 1. M GH S c r ip to r e s (Hanover,1 8 7 4 ),X X III,828. 2. H is to ir e l i t t ^ r a i r e de l a Prance ( P a r i s , 1 8 6 9 ),X I I , 6 . See a ls o t e x t oi1 Memorials E T storlarum , w r itte n by V ic to rin e canon Jean Bouin ( a f t e r 1322), in Bonnard, Op. c i t . , I . 85. 44 C. 0* D erlin g in h is D ia a e r ta tio de Hugone a Sancto V icto re, a work d e d ic a te d to the count of Blankenburg.3 According to D e rlin g , Hugh1a uncle was R heinhard, biahop o f H alber- a t a d t , a man who in hi8 y o u th had a tu d ie d a t Pari8 and had been a d i a c i p l e o f William of Champeaux. The name “Hugh" waa very r a r e , p r a c t i c a l l y u n h eard -o f in tw e lfth -c e n tu ry Germany. Thua th e r e a l name of our V ic to r in e a c h o la r would have been "Hermann" or "Haymon." But D erling t e l l a ua th a t the French, in t h e i r ig n o ran ce, r e f e r r e d to him aa "Hugh," and Hugh he has remained. Thia th e o ry of Saxon o r ig in has been defended by n o tab le French a c h o la ra , among them Hugo- n i n , 4 Kignon,5 and Bonnard.6 According to the aecond th e o ry , Hugh waa of Flem ish o r ig i n , born in the v i c i n i t y o f Yprea. This claim o r ig i n a ted in th e tw e lf th century from the te x t o f a m anuscript 3. C. G. D e rlin g , D ia a e r ta tio in a u g u r a lis p h ilo a o p h ic a de Hugone a Sancto V ic to re comite Blanckenburgenal (Helm- s t a d t ,1745). 4. Hugonin, "Esaai sur l a fo n d a tio n de l 'e c o l e de S t-V ic to r de P a r i s , " PL,CLXXV,40-44. 5. A. Mignon, Lea o rig in e a de la a c o la a tiq u e e t Huguea de S a in t- V ic to r (Paria«1895T,1,7-9. 6. Bonnard, 1,85-86. 45 of the m onastery o f Anchin and thus a n te d a te s the testim ony of Alb e r i c de T r o is - F o n ta in e s ,7 The same claim appears around th e same time in a m anuscript of Marchienne: "Anno ab incarnation© Domini MCXLI o b i i t dominus Hugo, canonicus S. V ic to r ia , t e r t i o idus f e b r u a r i i , qui Yprensi t e r r i t o r i o o r tu s , a puero e x u la v it." ® Given credence by M abillon, this Flemish th eo ry has been a c cep ted by v ario u s s c h o la rs . I t has tended to fin d fav o r e s p e c ia lly among th e French h i s t o r i a n s . 9 The t h i r d th e o ry d e s ig n a te s L orraine as the n a tiv e land of Hugh. The f i r s t in d ic a tio n o f t h i s appears le s s than h a l f a c en tu ry a f t e r Hugh in a t e x t of Robert du Mont (d .1 1 8 6 ), who r e f e r s in h is Chronica to "M agister Hugo l o t h a r i e n s i s . "1° Although t h i s th eo ry has not been as w idely h e ld as the o th e r s , i t n o n e th e le ss has had i t s cham pions , most n o ta b ly Dorn Mathoud.11 The p a r t is a n s of the Saxon and Fie mish th e o r ie s be 7. M abillon, V etera a n a le c ta ( P a r i s , 1723),1,133. 8. Martene e t Durand, Voyage l i t t £ r a i r e de deux b £ n ^ d ic tin s , ( P a r i s , 1 7 2 4 ) ,I I , 93. 9. P. Clement, H i s to i r e l i t t e r a i r e de l a France ( P a r i s ,1763), X I I ,2; U. C h e v a lie r, R e p e rto ire des sources h l s t o r i q u e s du moyen 3 g e : B io - b ib lio g r a p h ie , ( P a r i s ,190 3 -1 9 0 4 ).1 .2 2 1 7 . ID. M GH S c r ip t ores ,V It495. 11. Mathoud, "O b se rv a tio n e s," CLXXXVI, 1044,1064. 46 lie v e d th e y could base t h e i r p o s itio n on the t e x t drawn from Robert du Mont. M abillon poin ted out t h a t , a f t e r a ll* Flanders was th e boundary of a n c ie n t Lorraine* and t h a t someone born w ith in the confines of the two p rovinces would be c a lle d in d is c r im in a te ly o f one or of the o th e r . The a d h eren ts of th e Saxon th e o ry , fo r t h e i r p a r t , have p o in ted out th a t Saxony touches L orraine in one o f i t s e x tr e m itie s ; th ey c i t e the Anonymous of Jumifcges: "Hugo l o t h a r i e n s i s s ic d ic tu s a c o n fin io S a x o n ia e ."12 But i t has been o b jected t h a t th e testim ony of the Anonymous was l i f t e d from Robert du Mont and th u s has no value f o r purposes of d ecid in g on Hugh’s b i r t h p l a c e . I f we a r e to d is p e l any of th e confusion* we must tu rn to Hugh h im s e lf. In the D idascalicon he w r ite s : "Ego a puero expulavi* e t s c io quo moerere animus arctum a l l - quando p a u p e ris t u g u r i i fundum d eserat* qua l i b e r t a t e p o st- ea marmoreos l a r e s e t t e c t a la q u e a ta d e s p i c i a t . " I 3 I t is c l e a r t h a t th e t e x t o f the Marchienne m anuscript — "Hugo.. ..q u i* Y prensi t e r r i t o r i o ortus* a puero e x u l a v i t ," — is based on t h i s p assag e. I t has been p o in te d out t h a t th e "marmoreos l a r e s " comes from Cicero and th e "pauperis tu - 12. M GH S c r ip to r e S tVI*484. 13. D id a s c a lic o n , I I I . x x (PL,CLXXVI,778) 47 g u r i i " is taken from V e r g il. Thus i t is p o s s ib le t h a t the au th o r of th e Marchienne m anuscript had m istaken th e word " tu g a r t" f o r a p lace name, and had read "Y preti" in p la c e of " t u g u r i ." This would ex p lain his a s s e r t i o n o f Hugh's Ypres o r i g i n . 14 Both V ernet and Mignon have o b jected to th i s h y p o th esis however. Another Hugonian t e x t is to be found in th e prologue of De a rrh a anim ae,15 Hugh addressed t h i s t r e a t i s e to a b r o th e r "G" and to o th e r r e l ig i o u s of Hammersleben in Saxony. He s a lu te s them a l l , mentions b r o th e rs "B" and "A," and asks them to a c c e p t h is so lilo q u y in remembrance of him as a testam ent o f h is a f f e c t i o n f o r them. I t is obvious from t h i s passage th a t he had liv e d in t h a t monas te r y a t Hammersleben, I t is probably sa fe to conclude, th e n , t h a t Hugh, a man o f humble b i r t h , l e f t h is n a tiv e land of F landers or L orraine as a c h ild and came to Saxony, where he sojourned fct th e monastery of Hammersleben. His e a r ly p assio n f o r knowledge is in c o n te s ta b le . In the D id ascalico n Hugh w r i te s : "Ego a f fir m a re audeo n i h i l me 14. W. P re g e r, G eschichte der deutschen liy stik im M it t e l - a l t e r ( L e ip z ig ,1 8 7 4 ),1 ,2 2 9 . 15. De a r r h a animae, PL,CLXXVI,951-970. 48 unquam quod ad eruditioneni p e r t i n e r e t co n te m p sisse . . . Coarc- t a t a s c i e n t i a fucunda non est."H > At the abbey of S t. V ic t o r Hugh proved not only to be an a p t s tu d e n t, bu t an a b le te a c h e r and p r o l i f i c w r i t e r as w e ll. Under the tu t e l a g e of G ilduin and Thomas, he gained f o r the abbey a b r i l l i a n t r e p u ta tio n f o r le a r n in g . Hugh of S t. V ic to r , as he came to be c a l l e d , has l e f t some t h i r t y - n i n e t r e a t i s e s , one hundred and seventy-one s e n t e n t i a e , tw e n ty -th re e e p i s t l e s , and ten sermons. His w r itin g s f a l l in to fo u r c a te g o r ie s : th e a r t s , th eo lo g y , m y s tic a l works, and e x e g e s is. Hugh began h is w r itin g on th e l i b e r a l a r t s w ith a t r i logy c o n s is tin g of t r e a t i s e s on grammar and geometry and a dialo g u e which se rv e s to c l a s s i f y the v a rio u s d i s c i p l i n e s com prising the l i b e r a l a r t s — th e Epitome Dindlml in p h i l - osophiam. 17 His g r e a t work on the a r t s , the D idascalicon de s tu d io le g e n d ! , composed in th e l a t e 1 1 2 0 's, was w ritte n to p rovide an i n t e l l e c t u a l o r ie n ta ti o n fo r the s tu d e n ts coming to the sch o o l. The aim of the D id ascalico n i s to 16. D id a s c a lic o n . I . v i (PL, CLXXVI,799-801). 17. J .L e c le r c q , "Le De Grammatica de Hugues de Saint-Victor," A rchives d 'h is t o i r e d o c t r i n a l e e t l i t t e r a i r e du moyen Age XIV (1943-1945),263-322. "P ra c tic a Geometrlae." O s iris X II (1956),176-224. Baron,"Epitome Dindimi in philo so p h iam ." T r a d itio XI (1955),91-148. 49 d is c o v e r and d e fin e a l l th e a re a s o f knowledge which are im portant f o r man, to dem onstrate t h e i r e s s e n t i a l harmony, and t o show t h a t t h i s harmony of d i s c i p l i n e s is n e cessary f o r man not only to achieve human p e r f e c t i o n , fc- ' a lso to f u l f i l l h is d iv in e d e s tin y . In o th e r words, th e D id a s c a li con would co d ify and develop the p r in c ip l e s expressed in th e l e t t e r of H ild e b e rt. This concept of knowledge which Hugh s e t f o r t h in the D id ascalico n was a m a tte r of g r e a t im port. I t f l a t l y con t r a d i c t s th e n o tio n t r a d i t i o n a l l y (and u n f a ir ly ) a s c rib e d to m ediaeval th o u g h t, to w it, th e n o tio n t h a t f a i t h and reason were in co m p atib le, and t h a t sacred and s e c u la r s tu d ie s should no t be lodged under the same r o o f. This view, cropping up only now and again throughout the middle ag es, p e r i o d i c a l l y had led to a b reach between r e l i g i o u s and s c h o la rs : the l a t t e r were su spected of an in ch o ate paganism as opposed to the o fte n u n l e t t e r e d C h r i s t i a n i t y o f the form er. The Gregorian Reform to combat th e growing secularw ism in the Church had only widened th e gap. Although the monks of Citeaux and Pr^m ontrl could o c c a s io n a lly b o a st a prominent s c h o la r , such in d iv id u a ls were r a re indeed and blossomed in s p i t e of t h e i r o rd ers r a t h e r than because of them. We have testim ony to t h i s a t t i t u d e in a most i n t e r e s t - 50 ing document from th e 1 1 4 0 'a . Odo» p r i o r of the C is te rc ia n abbey of Morimond, had w r i tt e n a De aacram entis numerorum e t s i g n i f i c a t i o n i b u s rerum. In t h i s t r e a t i s e he had ex p re ss e d c e r t a i n opinions on the symbolic v alu e of numbers in Holy S c r ip tu r e . This had occasioned the severe rebuke of the dean of S t. E tien n e a t Besanpon, P e te r of Travea. The old c l e r i c reproached the p r i o r f o r the dangerous ideas he had le a rn e d under the t u te la g e of m aster Hugh a t the P a ris School of S t. V ic to r, where Odo had stu d ie d before becoming a C i s t e r c i a n . 18 Another s i g n i f i c a n t in c id e n t took p lace towards the end of th e cen tu ry , when a C is te rc ia n exegete was e x ile d f o r making use of contemporary Jew ish s o u rc e s . At S t. V ic t o r , on the o th e r hand, a cco rd in g to the testim ony of canons Andrew and R ichard, r a b b in ic a l s c h o la rs were f r e e l y c o n s u lte d , f o r Hugh h im self had i n s i s t e d on th e importance of l i t e r a l e x e g e s is. I t is ev id en t t h a t th e monks and the canons r e g u la r were worlds a p a r t in t h e i r o u tlo o k . The c a th e d ra l schools found them selves caught on the horns o f the dilemma. The School of Laon, under Lanfranc and Anselm, had deplored th e use of p h ilo so p h ic reasoning in th e te a c h in g of th e o lo g ic a l t r u t h s . In o rd e r to defend 18. See Appendix I I . 51 t h i s p o s itio n however, they were fo rced to use not only Holy S c r ip tu r e and the F a th e rs , b u t reason as w e ll. The r e s u l t n o n e th e le ss was th a t a t the School of Laon the study of th eology in c re a s in g ly dominated i n s t r u c t i o n in the a r t s , alm ost to e x c lu sio n . The School of C hartres on the o th e r hand had th e ad vantage of th e nascent Platonism of i t s m asters which would h elp i t to overcome the su sp ic io n o f the c l a s s i c s . Rather than ta k in g a balanced view of the harmony and n a t u r a l interdependence of a l l th e d i s c i p l i n e s , however, the C hart- ria n s emphasized the triv iu m in g e n e ra l and the are gram- mat ica in p a r t i c u l a r . The id e a l of b e l l e s - l e t t r e s ex pressed by John o f Sal isb u ry in h is M etalogicon and by T h ierry in the Heptateuchon r e f l e c t e d the te a c h in g s of Bernard of C h a rtre s, f o r whom th e a r t s of e le g a n t p ro se and eloquent speech were of h ig h e s t im portance. This a t t i t u d e was to provoke a r e a c tio n which led to th e form ation o f the C o rn ific ia n s e c t . Led by the monk I R eginaldus, th e group p r o te s te d t h a t too much time was de voted to s e c u la r s tu d ie s and e s p e c ia lly to grammar. They d isd a in e d the a n c ie n t pagans, a rg u in g th a t the study o f the more re c e n t C h r is tia n a u th o rs should s u f f i c e f o r w hatever I n s tr u c tio n in the a r t s was n e c e s sa ry . The C o m if ic ie n 52 movement, which was by no means w ithout i t s p a r t i s a n s , was to tro u b le the schools profoundly. In c o n t r a s t to th e se extrem es, the P a ris School of S t. V ic to r emphasized the complementary n a tu re of the v a rio u s l i b e r a l a r t s , in c lu d in g b o th the t h e o r e t i c a l and the p ra c t i c a l d i s c i p l i n e s . The V ic to rin e s s t r e s s e d , as had A r is t o t l e , t h a t a c a r e f u l grounding in t h e o r e t i c a l and p r a c t i c a l philosophy was n e c e ssa ry p re p a ra tio n f o r h ig h er th in g s , and in t h e i r case, f o r the "Queen of the S c ie n c e s," th e o lo gy. Hugh composed h is D idascalicon w ith the aim of s e t t i n g f o r t h t h i s i d e a l . In the t r e a t i s e he t e l l s the stu d e n t which s u b je c ts are most im p o rtan t. He d isc u s s e s the tim e- honored a u t h o r i t i e s on th ese v ario u s d i s c i p l i n e s and in s t r u c t s th e stu d e n t as to the l o g i c a l sequence of works in h is read in g program. The t r e a t i s e is d iv id ed in to two p a r t s : the s e c u la r and the sa c re d . The f i r s t p a r t in stru c ts the re a d e r in th e a r t s . The second guides him in th e re a d ing of S c r ip tu r e . Of p a r t i c u l a r s ig n if ic a n c e i s the f a c t t h a t Hugh s e ts f o r t h in the D id ascalico n the A r i s t o t e l i a n d iv is io n of knowledge, which d is tin g u is h e d the p r a c t i c a l a r t s from the t h e o r e t i c a l . The p r a c t i c a l a r t s were those which were de- 53 a i r a b l e p rim a rily f o r the sake of a c tio n ; th e t h e o r e t i c a l a r t s were those which were d e s ir a b l e in them selves. The curriculum of the seven a r t s was supposed to have had i t s o rig in in the school of I s o c r a te s . Cicero makes mention of " a r te s l i b e r a l e s " bu t does not l i s t them. A g e n e ra tio n l a t e r the S to ic idea th a t th e study of the l i b e r a l a r t s must precede the study of philosophy p ro p er was put f o r t h by P h ilo Judaeus. E arly in th e f i r s t century Varro l i s t e d nine l i b e r a l a r t s , adding a r c h i t e c t u r e and m edicine. Both V itru v iu s and Galen then drew up l i s t s , each d i f f e r i n g somewhat from V arro*s. I t was in th e l a t e f o u rth or more probably the e a r ly f i f t h century t h a t Mar- tia n u s Capella e s ta b lis h e d once and fo r a l l the s u b je c ts to be included in the canon o f l i b e r a l a r t s , and th e num b e r of these was s e v e n .19 The l i b e r a l a r t s as s e t f o r t h by th e S to ic s and N e o - p l a t o n i s t s , in c o rp o ra tin g th e se seven, f e l l in to th re e c a te g o r ie s : Logic ( r a t i o n a l p h ilo so p h y ), P hysics ( n a tu ra l p h ilo so p h y ), and E th ic s (moral philosophy). 19. On the h is to iy of the seven l i b e r a l a r t s , see M.L.W. L a is tn e r , Thought and L e tte r s in Western Europe, A.D. 500 to 900 tLondon,1931); W illiam H. S ta h l, Roman ScT- ence- fMadison, W isconsin, 1962); E.K. Rand, Pounders of th e Middle Ages (C am bridge,M assachusetts, 1928); and C. H. H askins, The R enaissance of the Tw elfth Century (Cam b rid g e ,M a ss a c h u se tts , 1927J. 54 R a tio n a l philosophy included grammar, r h e t o r i c , and d i a l e c t i c ; n a tu r a l philosophy included a r ith m e tic , geometry, a s- tromony, and m usic; moral philosophy encompassed the te a c h ings of C ocrates, P la to , and l a t e r Seneca. This t h r e e - f o l d c l a s s i f i c a t i o n , a s c rib e d erro n eo u sly to P la to by C icero, was p e rp e tu a te d by C ic e ro 's fo llo w e rs . S t. Augustine was to embrace the t r i p a r t i t e scheme, w ith c e r t a i n m o d ific a tio n s , in h is City of God, s u b s t i t u t i n g th e study of S c r ip tu r e f o r the moral philosophy of th e Greeks. I t was Boethius who f i r s t a p p lie d the term w quadriviunf to the four d i s c i p l i n e s o f n a t u r a l philosophy. This t e r minology was taken up by bo th Cassiodorus and I s id o r e , who passed i t on to the middle ag es. A p p ro p ria te ly , the rem aining th re e d i s c i p l i n e s — grammar, r h e t o r i c , and d i a l e c t i c — came to be s ty le d the "triv iu m " d u rin g th e Carol- in g ian epoch. The P la to n ic - S to ic d iv is io n of knowledge — r a t i o n a l , n a t u r a l , and moral philosophy — p re v a ile d throughout the e a r ly middle ag e s. A r i s t o t l e however had used a d i f f e r e n t c l a s s i f i c a t i o n . In h is Topics and M etaphysics he d i s t i n g uished between " t h e o r e ti c a l" philosophy — knowledge de s ir a b le f o r i t s own sake — and " p r a c t ic a l " philosophy — knowledge d e s ir a b le f o r th e sake of a c tio n . Boethius 55 adopted t h i s A r i s t o t e l i a n d iv is io n , and the c e le b ra te d "Lady Philosophy" of h is De co n so la tio n e wore the symbols of t h i s d iv is io n — 6 and 7T — on her garment. According to B o eth iu s, th e triv iu m was not p a r t of p h i l o sophy, bu t was r a t h e r a to o l ( "ferramentum" ) . His choice of words su g g ests a t o o l of the most b a s ic s o r t to be used fo r sowing and h a rv e s tin g the seeds of knowledge.20 While the t h r e e - f o l d "P la to n ic " d iv is io n of knowledge was c a r r ie d on by Bede, A lcuin, Rhabanus Maurus, and John Scotus E riugena, th e tw o -p art A r i s t o t e l i a n d iv is io n — 9 and '/T — was used by Remigius of Auxarre, G erb ert, D ulbert of C h a rtre s, and in th e tw e lf th century William of Conches. Hugh o f S t. V ic to r was th e f i r s t to expound a t le n g th on th e le a rn in g of the a r t s , and he too s e t f o r t h the A r is to t e l i a n d iv is io n of knowledge. Hugh and William o f Conches 20. B oethius, Jfa Isagogen P o rp h y rii Comments, CSEL,XXXXVIII, 8— 9. I n t e l l e c t i b l e A rithm etic Astronomy Geometry Music I n t e l l i g i b l e T h e o re tic a l N a tu ra l PHILOSOPHY - S o lita r y (e th ic s ) P r a c t i c a l - P riv a te (economics) •P u b lic ( p o l i t i c s ) 56 were in stru m e n ta l in u sh erin g in the d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e o r e t i c a l and p r a c t i c a l p h ilosophy. ”/hile they both se p arated the t h e o r e t i c a l from the p r a c t i c a l , t h e i r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n of the v a rio u s d i s c i p l i n e s d if f e r e d in p a r tic u la r s . These v a r i a t i o n s on th e b a s ic A r i s t o t e l i a n scheme were to have s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t s on l i t e r a t u r e and theology in the t w e l f t h c e n t u r y . 2 1 The C h a rtria n s did not co n sid er the triv iu m as a p a r t o f p h ilo so p h y , b u t r a t h e r as a to o l to be a p p lie d to p h i l osophy. Thus they emphasized t r a i n i n g in grammar, r h e t o r ic , and d i a l e c t i c by means of th e se a r t s . They stu d ie d l i t e r a t u r e — songs, poems, f a b l e s , and h i s t o r i e s — as a means of le a rn in g grammar, r h e t o r i c , and d i a l e c t i c . Thus they found them selves w ell in accord w ith the heightened l i t e r a r y a c t i v i t y of the tw e lf th century and the outpouring of L atin p o e try and v e rn a c u la r works to which i t gave r i s e . The V ic to r in e s , u n lik e the C h a rtria n s, included th e triv iu m in th e study of p h ilo so p h y . Grammar, r h e t o r i c , and d i a l e c t i c were not ta u g h t so much by example as by t e c h n i c a l t r e a t i s e s on the d i s c i p l i n e s them selves. Hence th e r e was not the same l i t e r a r y emphasis a t S t. V ic to r th a t one 21. For v a r i a t i o n s on the b a s ic scheme f o r c l a s s i f y i n g knowledge, see Appendix I I I . 57 would have found a t th e School of C h a rtre s. The V icto rin e s in s te a d emphasized th e o lo g y . But according to Hugh's v e r sion o f the A r i s t o t e l i a n d iv is io n of knowledge, "theology" was p a r t of the t h e o r e t i c a and was d i s t i n c t from the study of S c rip tu re i t s e l f . This development was to have im portant r e s u l t s . For th e a p p l i c a t i o n of th e A r i s t o t e l i a n scheme to th e m ediaeval corpus of knowledge e v e n tu a lly e f f e c te d a form al s e p a ra tio n of moral philosophy from re v e a le d th eo lo g y . In a very r e a l sen se, one could say t h a t th e V ic to rin e o r Hugonian id e a l reached i t s cu lm in atio n in th e l a t e t h i r t e e n t h century w ith Aquinas. For i t was S t. Thomas who s p e lle d out so c l e a r l y the d i s t i n c t i o n between f a i t h and reason as m utually ex clu siv e y e t a b s o lu te ly co m patible means of knowing. This then was th e s ig n if ic a n c e of the D id ascalico n of Hugh o f S t, V ic to r . Not only did i t s e t f o r t h the p r i n c i p le of C h r is tia n humanism while m a in ta in in g an abid in g lo y a l t y to Holy W rit, b u t i t was a lso th e f i r s t major work to s e t f o r t h the A r i s t o t e l i a n d iv is io n of knowledge, th e 6 and th e 1T. I t is c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of Hugh's work th a t a major w r i t ing would o fte n be preceded by a sm a lle r work s e t t i n g f o r t h an o u tlin e o f th e opus to fo llo w . This was a ls o the case 58 w ith h is D id a s c a lic o n . The p iece p receding i t , Epitome Dindimi in p h ilosophiam , 22 is p a r t of a s h o rt t r i l o g y on th e l i b e r a l a r t s . While th e o th e r two opuscules d eal w ith grammar and w ith geom etry, the Epitome ia a d is c u s s io n of the c o r re c t d iv i s i o n of philo so p h y . W ritten in the form o f a dialo g u e between "Sosthenes" and "Dindimus," the l i t t l e t r a c t s e ts f o rth in d e t a i l th e s e v e ra l p a rts of p h ilo so p h y , u rg in g th a t th ese d i s c i p l i n e s be m astered in p r e p a ra tio n f o r sacred s t u d i e s . Hugh's g r e a t concern th a t th e re be a proper emphasis on s e c u la r as w ell as sacred le a rn in g may be b e t t e r under stood in the l i g h t of hi3 th e o lo g ic a l w r i t i n g s . Hugh of S t. V ic to r s tr e s s e d above a l l e ls e the sacram ental s i g n i f i cance of the o rd er of n a tu r e . The n a tu r a l order p o in te d in every r e s p e c t to the d iv in e order of g ra c e . Hi3 major th e o lo g ic a l work was a summa e n t i t l e d De Sacram entis C h ristia n a e f i d e i . 2^ w hile most m ediaeval sufrmae were conceived simply along th e o lo g ic a l l i n e s , Hugh's 22. See p . 48 above. 23. De Sacram entis C h ristia n a e f i d e i , PL, CLXXVI, 183-618. See a ls o Hugh o f S t . V ic to r , "On the Sacraments o f th e C h ristia n F a ith " t r a n s l a t e d by Roy J . D e fe rra ri Team -” b rid g e , M assa c h u se tts, 1951). 59 De Sacraroentis follow s an h i s t o r i c a l scheme. For him th e sto ry of the F a ith is the s to ry of man in h isto ry * from Creation u n t i l th e Last Days. Taking the c r e a tio n of th e n a tu ra l order as h is s t a r t ing p o in t, Hugh launches in to a d isc u ssio n of th e Holy T r in ity as th e p rim o rd ia l cause of a l l th in g s. He goes on to d e sc rib e the c r e a tio n of an g els and the h ie ra rc h y of s p i r i t u a l b e in g s, the c r e a tio n of fre e w i l l and o f man k ind, and final!)y the f a l l of the f i r s t man. The s a c r a m ents, he t e l l s u s , were i n s t i t u t e d from th e beginning fo r the r e s t o r a t i o n of mankind. There a r e th re e kinds of s a c raments* th o se under the n a t u r a l law, those under the w r i t ten law, and those under g ra c e . This brin g s him to th e second p a r t of th e summa, d e a lin g w ith the I n c a rn a tio n , the v i s i b l e Church and the p rie s th o o d , and w ith the sacram ents of g race. His f i n a l c o n s id e ra tio n is the end o f the w orld. Hugh’s outlook is c l e a r l y h i s t o r i c a l . The h i s t o r y of the world is the h i s t o r y of the Church from the C reatio n to the f i n a l R e s u rre c tio n . Human h is to r y thus has a decid ed ly sacram ental n a tu r e . The h i s t o r y of mankind is the h i s t o r y of the sacram en ts, p ro ceeding from the e ra of n a t u r a l law to the w r i t t e n law and f i n a l l y to g ra c e . Throughout th e summa, th e n a t u r a l o rd er always p o in ts to the d iv in e , fo r 60 i t has been appointed t h a t r a t i o n a l man le a rn h u m ility by seek in g h is s a lv a tio n in the mute, in s e n s ib le elem ents of c r e a t i o n . 24 Besides h is emphasis on the sacram ental s ig n if ic a n c e of th e n a t u r a l w orld, Hugh would a ls o be renowned f o r h is e x p la n a tio n of the I n c a rn a tio n . His tre atm e n t of the m ystery of th e Word Made F lesh was in v a ria b ly c ite d in the polem ics over the H y p o static Union in the l a t e r p a r t of the c e n tu ry . This c o n tro v ersy c en tered about the paradox of a Divine Person assuming a human n a tu r e . Hugh of S t. V ic to r was considered one of the le a d in g a u t h o r i t i e s on th e m a tte r. His famous e x p o s itio n is found in th e De S acram en tis, Book Two, P a rt One, c h a p te r fiv e ("That the Word assumed f l e s h w ith punishm ent, w ith o u t f a u l t , w ith m o r a lity , w ith out i n i q u i t y . . . " ) , ch a p te r s i x ("That th e Word assumed r a t io n a l so u l w ith f l e s h , and o f what n a tu re t h a t so u l was in wisdom and v i r t u e and j u s t i c e and goodness and m e r i t . . . " ) , c h a p te r seven ("On th e f l e s h which th e Word assumed; of what n a tu re i t was acco rd in g to th e c a p a b i l i t y of s u f f e r i n g 24. The l a t e C.S.Lewis had a g r e a t a p p r e c ia tio n f o r the sym b olism which Hugh o f S t. V ic to r in c o rp o ra te d in to h is w r i ti n g . See, f o r in s ta n c e , c h a p te r two in Lewis' The A lleg o ry of Love (New York, 1958). 61 and f e e l i n g and a f f e c t i o n . . . ' 1), and c h a p te r nine ("On th e union o f Word, s o u l, and f l e s h . . . " ) . I t was from Hugh’s e x p o s itio n in the summa t h a t the orthodox p o s itio n of the union o f the Divine Person and human n a tu re d eriv ed i t s name* th e famous "homo assum ptua" th e o ry . This theory w ill be d isc u sse d a t g r e a t e r le n g th in C hapter VI below, in which we s h a l l deal w ith m aster Achard, th e abbot of S t. V ic to r who played a most a c tiv e r o le in th e c h r i s t o l o g i c a l c o n tro v e rs ie s which came to a head s e v e ra l decades a f t e r Hugh's d eath . J u s t as the D id ascalico n was preceded by a s m a lle r work s e t t i n g f o r t h i t s b a s ic scheme, so a lso Hugh p re fa c e d h is De Sacram entis w ith the t r e a t i s e De Sacram entis l e g ls n a tu r a l is e t s c r i p t a e ?5 This l i t t l e dialo g u e s e ts f o r t h th e b a s ic idea of th e sacram ental n a tu re of human h i s t o r y which is expanded in the summa. Here, as in th e la r g e r work, we see mankind seeking s a lv a tio n through the law of n a tu r e , th e w r i tt e n law, and g ra c e . Hugh’s o th e r major th e o lo g ic a l work, th e Sumww Senten- tia ru m , 26 served as a model f o r P e te r Lombard's famous Book 25. De Sacram entis le g is n a tu r a l i s e t s c r i ^ t a e , PL, CLXXVI, 17-42 26. Summa S e n te n tia ru m .PL. CLXXVI.42..172. 62 o f S e n te n c e s. Hugh’s sm a lle r work d e a lt w ith the th re e th e o lo g ic a l v i r t u e s , w ith the T r i n i t y , w ith the c re a tio n of the a n g e lic h o st and of mankind, and w ith the s a c r a m ents. Besides h is r e p u ta tio n as a th e o lo g ia n , Hugh of S t. V ic to r was a ls o noted fo r h is m y s tic a l w r itin g s . Among the b e t t e r known is h is so lilo q u y De a rrh a a n j L m a e , 2 7 in which th e s o u l, e x u lta n t beyond words, r e jo ic e s in i t s beloved. This i s a c l a s s i c d e s c rip tio n of th a t m y stic a l union of the so u l w ith God, brought about by p e r f e c t c h a r i t y . The l i t t l e t r a c t based on the F i r s t E p i s t l e of S t. John, De laude c a r i _ t a t i s , 2 8 m y s tic a lly connects c h a r ity and martyrdom. So g r e a t was the love of the m artyrs t h a t they were enabled to s u f f e r e x te r n a l wounds, f o r they had a lre a d y been wound ed w ith in by c h a r i t y , the d iv in e wound th a t is a d e lig h t to s u f f e r . In De amore sponsi ad s p o n s a r o , 2 9 Hugh uses the f o u rth c h a p te r of the C a n tic le of C a n tic le s as the founda t io n f o r a r ic h e x p o s itio n o f th e m y stic a l love of God f o r th e human s o u l. In y e t another work, De f r u c tib u s c a rn ls 27. De a r rh a anim ae»PL,CLXXVI,951-970. 28. De laude c a r i t a t i s , PL,CLXXVI,970-976. 29. De amore sponsi ad sponsam,PL,CLXXVI,987-994. 63 e t s p i r i t u s ,30 he d eals w ith the " tr e e of v i c e s ," rooted in p r id e , and the " tr e e of v ir tu e " whose ro o ts a re in hu m i l i t y , and of which the f r u i t is p e r f e c t c h a r i t y . But perhaps the most famous o f Hugh's m y s tic a l w r i t ings a re those th re e which take as t h e i r theme Noah's Ark: De a re a Noe a o r a l i , 31 De a re a Noe m y s t i c a , 3 2 and De v a n i t a t e r o u n d ! .33 The a rk , fo r Hugh, is the most p e r f e c t fig u r e of the dw elling-house of God in the s o u l. In th ese th re e works, Hugh t r e a t s of the h i s t o r i c a l , a l l e g o r i c a l , and moral sense of the a rk , but then goes one s te p beyond th e se to a h ig h e r m y stic a l sen se. The ark i s , f i r s t of a l l , the bo at which Noah b u i l t of gopherwood. But i t a ls o sta n d s f o r th e v i s i b l e Church, and, in the tro p o lo g ic a l se n se , r e p re s e n ts th e s tr u c t u r e of v i r t u e in the s o u l. In th e m ystic or h ig h e s t sen se, the ark i s t h a t combination of v i r t u e s which culm inates in an a l l - a b i d i n g c h a r ity . In th e De a re a Noe m ystica Hugh lik e n s the a rk to the Church, and h e re , as in h i s g r e a t summa De S acram en tis, he 30. De f r u c t i b u s c a rn is e t s p i r i t u s .PL,CLXXVI,997-1006. 31. De a r e a Noe m o r a li , PI,CLXXVI,619-680. 32. De a r e a Noe m y s tic a ,PL.CLXXVI,681-703. 33. De v a n i t a t e mundi,PL,CLXXVI,703-740. makes the founding of the Church co in cid e w ith the founding of the w orld. I t is q u ite p o s s ib le f o r men o f a l l ages through g race to be members of th e Church. Hugh d e a ls even more w ith h i s t o r y p ro p e r in the De v a n i t a t e mundi, in which he not only summarizes the e n t i r e Old Testament, but d i s cusses th e A postles and F ath ers of th e Church. In t h i s t r e a t i s e h is main theme is t h a t the passage of tim e, w ith a l l i t s storms and clouds, can be faced w ith q u ie t c o n f i dence from the s o u l ’s vantage p o in t in s id e th e a r k , fo r th e firm hand of God is on the t i l l e r . W e f in d in the De a re a Noe m oral! the r e c o n c i l i a t i o n of the co ntem plative w ith the a c tiv e l i f e , the r e c o n c i l i a tio n of th e m ystic and th e s c h o la r . From th e ark — the i n t e r i o r b a s tio n of the soul — th e re a re two e x i t s , a door and a window. The h e a r t goes out of the door f o r a c tio n , w hile f o r contem plation i t so ars lik e the dove through the window in the r o o f . But while th e window of contem plation may be opened a t w i l l , the door of a c tio n is c o n tr o lle d by God alo n e. Thus i t may be opened w ith o u t impairment of the soul only a t God’ s beckoning. Here then is th e defense of th e idea of v o c a tio n — the c a l l of God. To the w e ll-o rd e r ed so u l, obedience is a n e c e s s ity . Like h is p re d e c e sso r William o f Champeaux, Hugh f e l t t h a t th e s o u l 's response to the a r k 's opened door — - to the v o c a tio n — should e n t a i l a 65 r e a l s a c r i f i c e , as the contem plative soul gives of i t s e l f f o r the s p i r i t u a l nourishment of o th e rs . I t remains f o r us to d isc u s s th e e x e g e tic a l w ritin g s of Hugh o f S t. V ic to r . His ex eg esis was c e r t a i n l y c o n s is t e n t w ith h is a t t i t u d e towards se c u la r le a r n in g , h is t o r y , and the n a tu r a l w orld. For Hugh s tr e s s e d the importance of the l i t e r a l sense of S c r ip tu r e . Indeed, in h is De S c rip - t u r i s ,34 a manual f o r th e study of Holy 'Writ, he urges t h a t the l i t e r a l sense not be d esp ised , but r a t h e r t h a t i t be c a r e f u lly s tu d ie d . J u s t as man must humble h im se lf to seek s a lv a tio n through th e lowly th in g s of h is common exper ie n c e , so a ls o must the s tu d e n t deign to embrace the lowly l i t e r a l sense of S c r ip tu r e : "The outward form o f God's word seems to you, perh ap s, lik e d i r t , so you tram ple i t un d er f o o t . . . . But h e a r! th a t d i r t , which you tra m p le , opened the eyes of the b l i n d . "35 Hugh did not leave many s c r i p t u r a l commentaries. In deed, we have only h is notes on c e r t a i n o f th e Psalms and on th e O ctateuch, sermons on p a r t of E c c l e s i a s t e s , and an e x p o s itio n of Lamentations and of th e M a g n ific a t. But 34. De S c r i p t u r i s .PL.CLXXV.9-28. 35. From De S c r i p t u r i s , ch#5» t r a n s l a t e d in B.Sm alley, The Study of the B ib le in the Middle Ages (Notre Dame, 1964),pp, 93-94. 66 th e se w r itin g s t h a t he did leave co n tain a s e t of g u id e li n e s fo r the l i t e r a l e x p o sitio n of the B ib le . W e fin d th e se p r i n c i p l e s s e t f o r t h in P a rt Two of th e D idascalicon which d eals w ith the sacred w r itin g s , in the De S c r i p t u r i s , in h is prologue to E c c l e s i a s t e s , and in the N otulae on the O ctateuch. From th e se w r itin g s , we are able to form a p i c tu r e of the a u th o r as a d ed ic a te d te a c h e r who wanted to in c o rp o ra te in to the t r a d i t i o n a l curriculum of a r t s and sacred s tu d ie s a genuine b i b l i c a l s c h o la rs h ip . Master Hugh g e n tly chided the G regorian t r a d i t i o n which took leav e of the l e t t e r to c o n c e n tra te on a l l e g o r i c a l e x p la n a tio n s sometimes f a r removed from th e t e x t . I f th e l e t t e r does not speak p l a i n l y f o r i t s e l f , he i n s i s t s , then we must d is c e rn th e in te n tio n of th e a u th o r from the c o n te x t. I f th e passage y e t remains u n c le a r , then we must r e l y on th a t p a t r i s t i c e x p la n a tio n which is most consonant w ith th e F a ith . Rather than u n c r i t i c a l l y a c c e p t an a l l e g o r i c a l e x p la n a tio n , i t is much w iser to r e ly simply upon th e d i c t a t e s of the F a ith . He w r ite s : A ll S c r ip tu r e , i f expounded according to i t s own pro p er meaning / t h e l i t e r a l / , w i l l gain in c l a r i t y and p re s e n t i t s e l f to the r e a d e r 's i n t e l l i g e n c e more e a s i l y . . . I p e rs o n a lly blame th o se who s t r i v e s u p e r s t i t i o u s l y to f in d a m y stic a l sense and a deep a lle g o r y where none i s , as much as th o se who o b s tin a te ly deny i t , when i t i s t h e r e . 36 36. S m alley ,O p . c i t .,p.lO O (P r a e f a tio in E c c l e s i a s t e n ) 67 When Hugh d e a lt w ith Old Testament p r o p h e tic a l t e x t s , he c o n s is t e n t l y r e f e r r e d them not to th in g s to come, but in t e r p r e t e d them r a t h e r in th e l i t e r a l sense of p a s t h i s t o r i c a l e v e n ts. Besides c o n s u ltin g the u s u a l p a t r i s t i c sources to shed l i g h t on the S c r ip t u r e s , Hugh t r i e d to study them in the o r i g i n a l in s o f a r as i t was p o s s ib le . Thus we f in d him us-, ing not only the V ulg ate, but a l i t e r a l L atin t r a n s l a t i o n of th e O ctateuch from th e Hebrew. Not content to r e ly upon second-hand in fo rm a tio n , he sought out Jew ish te a c h e rs from whom he not only a cq u ired a f a i r competence in Hebrew, bu t a ls o le a rn e d Jew ish e x e g e tic a l te c h n iq u e s. Hugh's ab so rb ing i n t e r e s t in Hebrew s tu d ie s was to in s p ir e a t l e a s t two of h is s tu d e n ts — Andrew and Richard — to c a rry on th e s c h o la rly t r a d i t i o n a f t e r h is d e a th . Richard and p a r t i c u l a r l y Andrew of S t. V ic to r were to in flu e n c e g r e a t l y the tre n d towards l i t e r a l e x eg esis t h a t emerged in the l a t e tw e lf th c e n tu ry . Hugh of S t, V ic to r was an e x tra o rd in a ry in d iv id u a l — s c h o la r, m y stic , te a c h e r , th e o lo g ia n . I t has been su g g e st ed th a t i t was th e g r e a t b re a d th o f h is program, inv o lv in g a te n s io n between a t r u l y l i b e r a l ed u catio n in the a r t s and a h ig h ly s p e c ia liz e d study of S c r ip tu r e , which e v e n tu a lly 68 d e s tin e d the f a i l u r e of th e abbey school to curry on the t r a d i t i o n of C h ris tia n h u m a n i s m . 37 There is a c e r t a i n amount of t r u t h in t h i s t h e s i s . W e fin d n o n eth eless th a t th e Hugonian t r a d i t i o n was c a r r ie d on, i f not a t S t. V ic t o r , a t l e a s t by o th e r in d iv id u a l sc h o la rs — Robert Gros s e t e s t e f o r example — who were able to achieve th e scope of le a rn in g en v isio n ed by the famous V ic to rin e . But a t the P a ris school i t s e l f , only Richard of S t. V ic to r had th a t ra re combination of g re a t s c h o la s tic a b i l i t y and an a t t i t u d e of u n iv e rsa lism which could f o s t e r a genuine C h ristia n humanism. U n fo rtu n a te ly , t h i s combina t io n of a b i l i t y and a t t i t u d e was not something t h a t could be sy stem atized and i n s t i t u t e d a t a sch o o l. I t depended la r g e l y upon e x c e p tio n a l in d iv id u a ls who were a b le to r i s e to th e ta s k . Hugh of S t. V ic to r was an e x c e p tio n a l i n d i v i dual . 37. B. Smalley, O p . c i t . , p p .105-106. 69 V ANDREW OF ST. VICTOR Perhaps one of the most i n t e r e s t i n g and u n fo rtu n a te ly little -k n o w n of Hugh's p u p ils was Andrew of S t. V ictor* who became abbot of wigmore. Not only did he approach Sacred S c rip tu re w ith the a id of the l i b e r a l a r t s as Hugh had en couraged, but he a ls o passed th e Hugonian l i t e r a l - h i s t o r i c a l t r a d i t i o n to the g r e a t commentators of th e l a t e tw e lf th cen tu ry . As in the case o f Hugh, th e re has been c o n sid e ra b le co n tro v ersy over the o r ig in of h is p u p il Andrew. The so- c a lle d "Boston o f Bury"! wh0 f i r s t t e l l s of Andrew wrote "Andreas canonicus S. V ic to r ia e t A uditor M ag istri Kugonis, f l o r u i t . . . e t s c r i p s i t m u l t a . " ^ John Bale tr a n s c r ib e d Bury's n o t i c e , adding "sed Anglus n a t i o n e . " ^ Jean P its rep eated 1. See R. H. Rouse, "Bostonus B u rie n sis and th e Author of the Catalogus Scriptorum Ecclesiae." Speculum XLI (1966) 471-479. The a u th o r of” th e Catologus seems to have been one Henricus de K irk e ste d e . The person named a f t e r the town of Boston was the s c rib e who copied th a t m anuscript of the Catalogus coming in to th e p o ssessio n of John Bale. 2 . C atalo g u s, Cambridge U n iv e rsity L ib rary MS, Add.3470,p^3 3. Scriptorum i l l u s t r i u m m a jo ris B r i t a n n i a e . . . Catalogus (B a sle ,1557) p . 193. 70 t h i s in fo rm a tio n , but phrased i t in the follo w in g manner: "In Anglia p a re n tib u s Anglis n a tu a ." Furtherm ore, he sug g e ste d t h a t th e t r e a t i s e De Emmanuele w r itte n by Richard to confute Andrew was a t l e a s t p a r t i a l l y m otivated by the n a t u r a l p re ju d ic e of Scot a g a in s t Englishm an.4 L a te r b ib lio g ra p h e rs — LeLong, Tanner, Oudin, F a b ri- c iu s , B r i a l , F e r e t, Trochon, and Fourni^re — accepted the n o tio n of Andrew's E n g lish b i r t h w ithout q u e s tio n . H urter however expressed some u n c e r ta in ty on th e m atter of Andrew's o r i g i n . He was one of the f i r s t to q u e stio n the t r a d i t i o n a l b io g ra p h ie s . More r e c e n tly Beryl SmalleyS and Gregorio Calandra6 have c a s t s e rio u s doubts on the t r a d i t i o n o f Andrew's Eng l i s h o r ig i n . ’Vhile Andrew i s g e n e ra lly assumed to have come to th e P a ris abbey from a c ro ss the channel, the ques tio n now is d e f i n i t e l y an open one, and one in which th e re is need f o r f u r t h e r in v e s t i g a t i o n . The c o n tin u in g disco v - 4. Relationum h is to ric a ru m de rebus A n g licis ( P a r i s . 1619K 1,214. 5. B. Sm alley, "Andrew of S t. V ic to r , Abbot of Wigmore; a Tw elfth Century H e b r a is t," Recherches de th e o lo g ie an- cienne e t m £di£vale,X (1938), 358-373. 6. G. C alandra, De h i s t o r i c a Andrae V i c t o r in i e x p o sitio n e in E c c le s ia s te n (Palerm o,1948). 71 ery of m an u scrip ts r e l a t e d to h is school h o p e fu lly w i l l shed a d d itio n a l l i g h t on the o r ig in of th e V ic to rin e sc h o la r who became abbot of Wigmore. Our source f o r the foundation o f Wigmore i t s e l f , where Andrew, drawing on the te a c h in g s of Hugh, was to launch a t r a d i t i o n of h is own, is an anonymous t h i r t e e n t h - century Anglo-Norman m an u scrip t. I t d e s c rib e s the found ing of Wigmore abbey as tak in g p la c e during the reig n of King Stephen, t h a t i s , between 1135 and 1154. I t concludes w ith info rm atio n on the bequest to the abbey of Roger of Mortimer, who died in 1214. The abbey was founded in Wales during the t u r 1 '* ^''nee of c i v i l war. I t s c h ie f p a tro n , Hugh of Mortir moving the canons from p lace to p la c e befo rf agree on a s i t e th a t s u ite d him. I t was a t t ju n c tu re t h a t the canons decided they would c s e l e c t an a b b o t. The man chosen was Andrew of ~«.orj Tant come eus fu re n t en t e l purpos s i oyrent p a r l e r de m estre Andrew q i f u t adonke p r io r de S e in c t V ic to r de Parys, m estre de d i v i n i t y e t de nobles v e rtu e s e t p lu s u rs e t sobr£; s i manderent a lu y , em p r ia n tz q u ’ i l d e ig n a st a eus v e n ir e t p rendre la cure de abbl e t e s tr e governour s u r eus e t l o r choses ordyner com p r e l a t . Le quel Andrew vynt a eus e t f u t re - ceu a g ra u n t re v eren c e, e t abb£ ben et de l%veske.' 7. M S Chicago U n iv .L ib ra ry ,2 2 4 ,f o . 3 r , as c i t e d in Smalley, 9 2 . c i t . , p . 365. 72 W e n o te th a t the m anuscript r e f e r s to Andrew as " p rio r " of S t. V ic to r. But John of Toulouse, in h is An- t i q u i t a t m p ,8 makes no mention of Andrew among the p r io r s of th e P a ris abbey. He l i s t s Odo as the t h i r d p r i o r , who h eld o f f ic e u n t i l li4 8 ; as the fo u rth p r i o r , N a n tie r, un t i l 1162; then Richard of S t. V ic to r as th e f i f t h p r i o r . If however our Anglo-Norman source is c o r r e c t , as Smalley and Calandra b e lie v e , then Andrew would indeed have h e ld o f f i c e as p r i o r , but only f o r a very s h o rt tim e. Presum ab ly he would have follow ed Odo in 1148, serv in g as p r i o r only u n t i l h is e l e c tio n s e v e ra l months l a t e r as abbot o f the d au g h ter house in Wales. Between 1148 and 1154 a d iff e r e n c e aro se between ab bo t Andrew and h is canons. According to our m a n u sc rip t, "Endementres sourdy un d estan ce p a re n tre l'a b b £ Andrew e t ses chanoines p ar unt l'a b b £ s 'e n d e p a r ti de eus, e t lo r s l e s s a t o t a lo r v o lu n t^ , e t re to u rn a a sa mesim de S e in c t V ictor."® E v id e n tly the canons of Wigmore needed an abbot w ith e x tra o rd in a ry a d m in is tr a tiv e a b i l i t y and s u f f i c i e n t energy to be an e f f e c t i v e spokesman b e fo re t h e i r w him sical 8. A ntiq u itatu m r e g a l l s a b b a tia e S a n c ti V ic to r ia l i b r i duo- decim, M S P a ris B ib lio th k q u e N a tio n a le , L atin 14677- 14678. 9. Sm alley, O p .c it. ,p .5 6 5 . 73 p atro n Hugh of Mortimer. Andrew was c e r t a i n l y more a sc h o la r than an a d m in is tr a to r . He l e f t Wigmore during the d isse n sio n and re tu rn e d to the P a r is abbey, where he b u rie d h im self once again in h is s tu d ie s and te a c h in g . Although he was to remain fo r some y ears a t the mother house, An drew of S t. V ic to r would always be r e fe r r e d to as "the abbot of Wigmore." Tired of bein g moved from p la c e to p la c e , th e Welsh canons found an ab le le a d e r in one Roger, a mere novice, b u t a man of e x c e p tio n a l a b i l i t y . His e le c tio n in p lace of bookish Andrew was r e a d ily approved by the bishop of H ereford. Abbot Roger soon proved h im self by d e a lin g su c c e s s f u lly w ith Hugh of Mortimer, and a new and permanent s i t e was g ran ted to th e V ic to rin e canons a t Wigmore. When Roger died in 1162 the canons turned once again to h is scholarly p re d e c e sso r fo r g uidance. An e x ta n t l e t t e r from the bish o p of H ereford to Abbot E rv ise o f S t. V ic to r, humbly re q u e stin g Andrew’ s re in s ta te m e n t, is couched d ip lo m a tic a lly in terms of g r i e f and re p e n ta n c e : "The church, having l o s t h e r shepherd, wishes to r e tu r n to th e p a stu re whence she drew h er f i r s t shepherd, and to be under the yoke of o b e d ie n c e ."10 10. Smalley, O p .c it. , p.367. 74 I t is not a t a l l improbable th a t Andrew resumed his a b b a tia l d u tie s w ith the g r e a t e s t re lu c ta n c e . The l i b r a r y a t wigmore was q u ite s p a rs e , and the Welsh b o rd e r was s t i l l in tu rm o il. An i n t e r e s t i n g l e t t e r in th e V ic to rin e c o l l e c t i o n , probably w r i tt e n by Andrew upon his reappointm ent, complains b i t t e r l y o f hia sudden change in f o rtu n e : "etiam spem viv en d i mihi s u b t r a x i t . . . He would r a t h e r have died than t h a t t h i s c o n d itio n come to p a s s. D espite h is m isgivings Andrew was r e i n s t a l l e d , and remained abbot of Wigmore u n t i l h is d e a th in 1175. I t was not a t Wigmore, but r a t h e r a t th e P a ris abbey th a t Andrew of S t. V ic to r did h is w r itin g . His works are s o le ly e x e g e tic a l, and f a l l in to th re e n a tu r a l d i v i s i o n s . The f i r s t c ateg o ry c o n s is ts of the h i s t o r i c a l e x p o s itio n s : Expos i t i o G e n e sis, Guper Pentateuchum , Super Josue e t JudJL- cum l i b r o s , In IV l i b r o s Regum, In Paralipom ena, and In lib r o s Machabeos. In the second category a r e h is w r itin g s on th e P ro p h ets: Super Isaiam , In Jeremiam, In E zechielam , Super Danielam, and In XII Prophetas M inores. Andrew’s commentaries In P ro v e rb ia et E c c le s ia s te n comprise the th ir d group. 11. MS. V atic a n , R egin.L at .1 7 9 ,f o . 2 0 3 ., as c i t e d in Smalley, O p . c i t .« p . 368. 75 Andrew's e x p o s itio n of the H eptateuch seems to have been w r itte n b e fo re h is f i r s t sta y a t Wigmore (1148). The rem ainder of h is w r itin g would have been accom plished d u r ing h is second p e rio d a t the P aris abbey, sometime between 1148 and 1163. In h is g e n e ra l prologue to the P ro p h e ts, Andrew e x p la in s th a t the e x p o s itio n to follow is f o r p u r poses of h is own study, fo r he cannot always have access to re fe re n c e b o o k s .^2 This would d e sc rib e c o n d itio n s a t Wigmore, sin c e commentaries and g lo ssed books were p l e n t i f u l a t S t. V ic to r . The m anuscript t r a d i t i o n in d ic a te s beyond doubt th a t Andrew was a s tu d e n t and d i s c i p l e of Hugh of S t. V ic to r. Furtherm ore i t is c l e a r th a t Andrew tau g h t a t the P a ris school a f t e r Hugh's d e a th . The f i r s t d i r e c t state m e n ts come from Stephen Langton, who admired Andrew's l i t e r a l ex eg esis and quoted him o f te n : "M agister Hugo de Sancto V ic to re di c e b a t. . . .e t hoc te n e t A n d r e a s ! * "Andreas S an cti V ic to r is magistrum Hugonem se c u tu s d ic it" 1 3 The Catalogus of "Boston of Bury" r e f e r s to "Andreas canonicus S. Vic- 12. M S P a r is , Bibliothfcque M azarin e,175,f o .9 3 r . Cited in Smalley, O p . c i t . ,p .3 7 1 . 13. From la n g t o n 's G losses on the O ctateuch, M S T r i n i t y Colt lege Oxford, n o .65. Cited in Smalley, O p . c i t . , p . 358. 76 t o r i s e t a u d ito r M a g istri I I u g o n i s . " 1 4 L a te r John Bale, e d itin g the c a ta lo g u e , commented: . . . i n omni l i b e r a l ! a r t e e t p h ilo a o p h ia ex- e r c i t a t u s , tantum in i l l i s p r o f e c i t , quantum ip sa sane adm irabatur a 1ta s . Juvenia adhuc, in a c r i p t u r i a a a c ria l i b e n t e r m e d ita b a tu r, Ilugonem de S. V ic to re , v i rum celeb e r r imum e t Saxonem g en ere, magistrum ac praeceptorem h abena.15 Jean P i t s , w r itin g s ix ty years l a t e r , added "Sub quo /R u - g o n e/ ta n ta i n d u s t r i a theologiam d i d i c i t , quanta p o stea laude e t applausa p u b lic itu s eamdem d o c u it." 1 6 Not only was Andrew a p u p il of Hugh of S t. V ic to r, but i t is e v id e n t th a t Hugh e x e rc ise d a powerful in flu e n c e on Andrew’s approach to s c r i p t u r a l e x e g e s is . Hugh is thus i n d i r e c t l y a founder of what Smalley has c a lle d the "school” of Andrew of S t. V ic to r , the t r a d i t i o n of l i t e r a l ex eg esis which was f o s te r e d a t Wigmore and which subsequently be came the model fo r the g re a t exegetes of th e l a t e tw e lf th century — P e te r the Chanter, P e te r Comestor, and Stephen L a n g to n .I 7 14. "Boston o f Bury" c ite d in Smalley, O p .c it. ,p .3 6 3 . 15. B ale, Scriptorum c ite d in C alandra, O p . c i t . , p . x v i i i . 16. P i t s , O p . c i t .,p .2 1 4 . 17. B. Sm alley, "The School of Andrew of S t . V ic to r ," Re- cherches de th e o lo g ie ancienne e t m ^di£vale,X I (1939) 145-167. 77 In the D idascalicon and again in the De S c r i p t u r i s , Hugh s tr e s s e d th e importance of the " l e t t e r ” as the foun d a tio n f o r b i b l i c a l e x p o s itio n . He reproves those who rush headlong in to a lle g o ry b e fo re they have determ ined s a t i s f a c t o r i l y j u s t what the sacred au th o r a c t u a l l y meant. Furthermore Hugh had advocated a thorough t r a in i n g in b i b l i c a l h i s t o r y . That h is own outlook is h i s t o r i c a l is shown in h is De Sacrament i s . In t h i s monumental summa the framework f o r Hugh's th e o lo g ic a l s y n th e s is is human h i s t o r y , which he c o n sid e rs in two s ta g e s : mankind f a l le n and mankind re s to r e d to g ra c e . In t h i s sense the De Sac rament is is a c h ro n ic le of world h i s t o r y . In some of h is s h o rte r works, Hugh made comments on Old Testament passages which are extrem ely l i t e r a l in ch ar a c t e r . I t is c le a r from the work of Andrew and Richard of S t. V ic to r th a t the g re a t m aster sought to guide h is p u p ils along th ese same l i n e s . Indeed, Galandra a s s e r t s : "Magis- te r ...H u g o hebraicam linguam s u f f i c i e n t e r c a l l e b a t , quam proinde valde p r o b a b i l i t e r d is c ip u lo s docebat. Haec scho- l a s t i c a linguae c o g n itio p o ste a p e r f i c i e b a t u r per Hebraeum quern u t magistrum in v e n ire tunc tem poris non e r a t diff!cile."18 18. Calandra, O p .c it. ,p .x x v i . 78 I t was Hugh, th en , who in sp ire d Andrew to devote him self to the g re a t ta sk of b i b l i c a l s c h o la rs h ip which he had en v isio n ed and d esc rib e d in the De S c r i p t u r i s . In c a rry in g out th i s commission Andrew of S t. "Victor co n su lted Jewish a u t h o r i t i e s . He seems to have been the f i r s t m ediaeval commentator to use Jew ish sources system a t i c a l l y . And alth o u g h Roger Bacon would c r i t i c i z e An drew’s e x e g e s is, he c r e d its him ap p rovingly w ith sending subsequent commentators to the o r i g i n a l Hebrew: In hoc autem probandum e s t multum, quod ex- c i t a t nos ad l o c a l i a dubia n o s tra e t r a n s l a - tio n i3 m u lto tie n s , l i c e t non semper, et t r a n s m i t t i t nos ad Hebraeum, u t e x p o s it i - ones quaeramus c e r t i u s in r a d ic e . Pauci enim et aliorum multorum, n i s i Andream re - s p ic e re n t in hac p a r t e . 19 The p re c ise i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of Andrew'3 Jewish sources is a d i f f i c u l t m a tte r. A major problem p re se n ts i t s e l f when we tr y to e stim a te Andrew's p e rso n a l knowledge of Hebrew. B r ia l, Trochon, H u rter, and i’o u rn ie re had cred ited him w ith c o n sid e ra b le p ro fic ie n c y in b o th Greek and Hebrew. But alth o u g h Andrew must have had a t l e a s t a f a i r command of b i b l i c a l Hebrew, Smalley has p o in te d out th a t he could 19. Bacon, Compendium s t u d i i p h ilo s o p h ia e , v i i i (Brewer, R o lls S e r i e s ) p . 482-483. Cited in Sm alley, "Andrew of S t V ic to r - Tw elfth-Century K ebraist,"p.361. h a rd ly have understood the ra b b in ic Hebrew in which tw e lf th - c e n tu r y Jew ish commentaries were w r i t t e n . 20 Andrew c i t e s as one of h is so u rces "Hebraeus meus." E a r l i e r m ediaeval H e b ra ists used t h i s term w ithout q u a l i f i c a t i o n , bu t in f a c t t h e i r q u o ta tio n s were not uncommonly deriv ed d i r e c t l y from E t. Jerome, who perhaps depended on O rigen. According to Smalley Andrew u s u a lly employed the ex p ressio n "Hebraeus meus" to denote a con tem porary,2 1 C alan d ra’ s study has shed more l i g h t on the m a tte r, f o r he had the b e n e f i t of an a d d i t i o n a l decade of re se a rc h by the Rabbi Dr. Rabinow itz, who had been using S m alley's t r a n s c r i p t s of Andrew to determ ine th e i d e n t i t y of h is Jew ish s o u r c e s .22 Andrew seems to have re c e iv e d much of h is in form ation o r a l l y . According to Calandra "Hebraeus meus" was one of two s c h o la r s . He was p o s s ib ly a Jew of the school of R ashi, v/hich deriv ed i t s t r a d i t i o n from the compendium o f Rashi Colomon, p re se rv e d and expounded by h is son Isaac (1040-1105). But in view of the d i f f i c u l t y of comprehending contemporary ra b b in ic Hebrew and thus the n e c e s s ity of reco u rse to an o ra l so u rce, the more p la u s ib le 20. Smalley, O p . c i t . , p . 3 6 2 . 80 a l t e r n a t i v e suggested by Calandra would be a Jew o f the school of Joseph Bekhor Shor. These l a t t e r s c h o la rs , whose te ach in g s d eriv ed from an independent M d ra s h t r a d i t i o n , ta u g h t l i t e r a l e x p o sitio n e x c lu s iv e ly .^ 3 In so fa r as Andrew made prudent use of these so u rc e s , he was c a rry in g on the V ic to rin e t r a d i t i o n of b i b l i c a l s c h o la rs h ip based upon a firm foundation in the l i b e r a l d i s c i p l i n e s , f a s t e r Hugh, r e a l i z i n g th a t th e S c r ip tu r e s had not been produced JLn vacuo, had taught th a t they could not be p ro p e rly u n derstood w ithout th e b e n e f it of s e c u la r s tu d i e s . Hugh's most famous p u p ils — Andrew and Richard of S t. V ic to r —- were both to c a rry on the Hugo- nian t r a d i t i o n in t h e i r approach to the sa c re d w r i t i n g s . Andrew of S t . V ic to r e s p e c ia lly was to serve as a v e h ic le through which th e Hugonian t r a d i t i o n would be spread beyond th e V ic to rin e community. Like R ichard, An drew of S t. V ic to r was to become a noted a u t h o r it y in h is own r i g h t . Roger Bacon complained t h a t many contemporary exegetes gave Andrew an a u th o r ity which should have been reserved to the F a t h e r s . 24 23. Cassuto, S t o r i a d e l l a L e tte r a tu r a S b ra ic a P o s t b i b l i c a (F lo ren ce, 1 9 3 8 ),p . 92. 24. Bacon, c ite d in Smalley, O p .c i t .,p .3 6 1 . 81 Both Landgraf and Smalley have used the ex p ressio n "school of Andrew of S t. V icto r" to denote the in flu e n c e of th e tw e lf th - c e n tu r y H eb raist and the commentators who were so h e a v ily in debted to him .25 On the o th e r hand, J . Ch§tiDlon c o n s id e rs Sm alley’s d e s c rip tio n of the l i t e r a l tre n d in e x e g e sis as the "school" of Andrew of S t. V ic t o r an o v e rsta te m e n t, because those who follow ed Andrew do not appear to have been h is d i s c i p l e s . This view had been expressed e a r l i e r by Trochon in a sh o rt study of Andrew’s c a r e e r . Chsttillon admits however th a t Andrew not only i s c i t e d , b u t is u t i l i z e d s y ste m a tic a lly from the end of the tw e lf th c e n tu ry by a g r e a t number of exegetes whose works d e f i n i t e l y s ig n i f y the break between the pu rely a l le g o r ic a l and th e l i t e r a l method of b i b l i c a l e x e g e s is .26 There a re no in d ic a tio n s of i n t e r e s t in Old Testament h i s t o r y and t e x t u a l c r i t i c i s m which could have served as a s t a r t i n g p o in t for th e l a t e tw e lfth -c e n tu ry commentators. At the beginning of th e century the schools of lao n and l a t e r P aris c o n c e n tra te d on the th e o lo g ic a l co n ten t of 25. A. Landgraf, Einfuhrung in die G eschichte d er th e o lo - gischen L i t e r a t u r d e r F rfih sch o lastik (R a tis b o n n e ,1948), p . 117-128; B. Sm alley, "The School of Andrew of S t. Viev t o r , " c i t e d above. 26. J . C h S tillo n , "De Guillaume de Champeaux & Thomas Gal- l u s , " Revue du moyen &ge l a t i n , V I I I (1952)254. 82 S c r ip tu r e . Only in the g lo ss e s on S t. Paul do we fin d many C.uaestiones. This was th e case in the sc h o o ls. In the c l o i s t e r the commentators c a r r ie d on th e m o ra liz in g t r a d i t i o n o f C assian, S t. Gregory, and Rhabanus Maurus. Soon a f t e r th e middle of the tw e lf th century however, we see the sudden r i s e of what Grabmann has d esc rib e d as the " b ib lic a l-m o r a l" school a t P a r i s . P e t e r Comestor, P e te r the C hanter, and Stephen Langton a re th e best-known commentators of t h i s new t r a d i t i o n . W e must a lso c o n sid e r Robert de Courson, Guy d ’O rc h e lle s, Roland of Cremona, Godfrey of T o i t i e r s , and Hugh of S t. Cher a3 proponents of t h i s new h i s t o r i c a l emphasis which we 'must i d e n t i f y w ith the V ic to r in e t r a d i t i o n . C e rta in ly the Comestor, the Chanter, and Langton can be d esc rib e d as having a common and c h a r a c t e r i s t i c i n t e r e s t in b i b l i c a l s c h o la rs h ip and in l i t e r a l ex eg esis as d is tin g u is h e d from bo th the dogmatic and s p i r i t u a l expo s i t i o n . In t h i s they d ec id e d ly d e p a rte d from A belard, G ilb e r t of la P o rre e , Robert o f Melun, P e te r Lombard, and P e te r of P o i t i e r s . B eryl Smalley has c l e a r l y dem onstrated t h a t Andrew’ s commentaries on the H eptateuch are a p r i n c i - 27. M. Grabmann, G eschichte der 3C holastichen Methode (F re ib u rg , 1 9 1 1 ) ,I I , 4 7 6 f f . 83 p a l source f c r the H is to rie a of P e te r Comestor. The Com e s to r was h im se lf a former V ic to rin e sc h o la r and undoubt edly a one-tim e p u p il of Andrew. He never r e f e r s to An drew by name, b u t i t was not customary then to c i t e li v i n g s c h o la rs in th a t fa sh io n . P e te r Comes t o r 's H is to r ie s were d e d ic a te d to W illiam , archbishop of Sens (1169-1175), and Andrew did not d ie u n t i l October, 1175. P e te r th e Chanter a ls o quotes a t le n g th from Andrew w ith o u t acknowledgement. In hi3 e x p o sitio n of the Kex- aemeron as w e ll as h is commentary on the f i r s t fo u r books of Numbers, he borrows long passages from the V ic to r in e . In the same l i t e r a l t r a d i t i o n was Stephen Langton. By the time Stephen was w r i ti n g , Andrew had been dead long enough to be c ite d by name, and Langton is the f i r s t commentator to do t h i s . He makes ample use of Andrew's work in h is g lo s s e s on th e P e n ta te u c h and on Kings. Langton, l i k e the Comestor and th e Chanter, was q u ite i n f l u e n t i a l , and h is g lo s s e s , l i k e t h e i r s , were w idely re a d . Thus Andrew of S t. V ic to r , th e b i b l i c a l sc h o la r of th e Hugonian t r a d i t i o n , was in tro d u ce d to an in c r e a s in g ly wide c i r c l e of commenta t o r s . Among them was Hugh of S t. Cher, the f i r s t to quote Andrew on th e P ro p h e ts, in t h i s case E z e c h ie l and Hosea. B eryl Smalley has dem onstrated th a t Andrew's ex eg esis p e n e tr a te d e a r l y in to m onastic c i r c l e s . She c iteB th e De 84 T rip artite) T abernaculo of the S c o ttis h P rem onstratensian canon, Adam, which was w r itte n in 118C. In a d d itio n to t h i s she has found re fe re n c e s to Andrew in v a rio u s t h i r te e n th -c e n tu ry m arginal g lo s s e s . Smalley discovered two q u o ta tio n s of "Andreas in o r i g i n a l i " in the Vocabularium B ib lia e , a d ic tio n a r y of b i b l i c a l term s compiled in mid- t h i r t e e n t h century by 'vill i a m B r ito . Both q u o ta tio n s ap pear to have been taken d i r e c t l y from Andrew, f o r they had not been c ite d p re v io u sly by in te r m e d ia r ie s . Even Thomas Aquinas, in h is Super Esaiam, c i t e s Andrew as "Iudaeus" and c i t e s h is opinion on m essianic p ro p h e c ie s. The S p ir i t u a l F ran ciscan P e te r John O livi (d.1290) quotes Andrew on Kings and E z e c h ie l. Nicholas of Lyra, w r itin g in th e e a rly f o u rte e n th cen tu ry , a ls o c i t e s Andrew's commentary on Kings, w hile h is contemporary, th e Dominican N icholas T revet, makes e x te n siv e use of the V i c t o r i n e 's tw o-fold e x p o sitio n of L e v i t i c u s . 28 P a ra d o x ic a lly , th e V ic to rin e community i t s e l f had r e je c te d the l i t e r a l h i s t o r i c a l ex eg esis of the school by the end of the tw e lf th c e n tu ry . The b i b l i c a l s c h o la rs h ip o f Hugh of S t. V ic to r had been developed co n sid e ra b ly by h i s p u p il Andrew and was spread f a r and wide. But t h i s i n t e l 28. Smalley, O p .c it. ,163-166. l e c t u a l h e r ita g e was to pass from the P a ris canons the mendicant s c h o la rs of the P a ris u n i v e r s i t y . 86 VI ACHARD OP ST. VICTOR Then G ilduin died in 1155, another of Hugh's p u p ils — Accardus or Achard of S t. V icto r — - was e le c te d to f i l l h is p la c e . Thus Achard was to become the second abbot of S t. V ic to r . Although a p u p il of Hugh, and a inuch esteemed one a t t h a t , Achard was noted not f o r h is pedagogy or h is scho l a r l y achievem ents as such, bu t r a t h e r f o r h is m e rit as a th e o lo g ia n . A chard's i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y cen tered around the c h r i s t o l o g i c a l c o n tro v e rs ie s of th e day, in which he played a prominent p a r t . N o n eth eless, A chard's regime as abbot of S t. V ic to r was a c r u c i a l one. Por he was in charge a t the high po in t of the P a ris sch o o l. A fte r Achard, and i n d i r e c t l y because of h is p o l i c i e s , th e school was to e n te r upon i t s gradual d e c l i n e . There a r e two r a t h e r i n t e r e s t i n g b io g ra p h ic a l t r a d i tio n s re g a rd in g Achard of S t. V ic to r . The o ld e s t b i o g ra p h e rs a ffirm t h a t Achard was P n g lis h , born in Northum b e r la n d . He is g e n e r a lly thought to have embraced the 37 r e l ig i o u s l i f e a t the p r io r y of canons r e g u la r a t B rid lin g to n in Y o rk sh ire, b e f o re coming to the abbey of S t. V ic to r on the c o n tin e n t. The o th e r, a l a t e r t r a d i t i o n , lo c a te s Achard’ s b i r t h p l a c e in the v i c i n i t y of Dornfront in Normandy. H is to r ia n s holding th i s view b e lie v e him to have been descended from the famous Achard of noble l i n eage whose memory is p re se rv e d in th e annals of Dornfront. Of the E n g lish t r a d i t i o n , our f i r s t source is an e p i taph, w r itte n f o r Achard a t the beginning of the t h i r t e e n t h c e n tu r y : Huius o liv a domus, Anglorum g l o r i a c l e r i , Jam dignus pridem c e l e s t i luce f o v e r i, F e lix Achardus f lo r e n s e t a t e s e n i l i , P re su l A bricensis ex hoc s ig n a tu r o v i l i . l Another e p ita p h , w r itte n much l a t e r , is more i n t e r e s t i n g : Anglia me g e n u it, d o c u it me G a llia , Doctorem t e n u i t i l i a patremque g r e g is , Pontificem fa c ie n s f e c i t Normanniae finem. Haec t u l i t , e x t u l i t haec, a b s t u l i t haec hominem.2 These im ag in ativ e lin e s were composed by Robert Ceneau, bishop o f Avranches, and appeared in h is G a llic a h i s t o r i a in 1557. The e p ita p h is more e x p l i c i t as to A chard's b i r t h in England, h is l i f e of p ra y e r and study in France, and h is ev en tu al appointm ent to a b is h o p ric (Avranches) in Normandy. 1. M S P a r is M azarin e,7 7 8 ,fo ,1 4 6 r. 2. G a llia C h ristia n a XI (l7 5 9 )c o l.4 8 1 7 . 88 In a d d itio n to the ep itap h s th e re are v ario u s c a t a logue so u rc e s . Towards th e end of the f o u rte e n th or the b eg in n in g of the f i f t e e n t h cen tu ry the s o -c a lle d "Boston of Bury" l i s t e d in h is Catalogus among the m anuscripts a t Bury S t. Edmonds: "Achardus Anglus, i n t e r c e te ro composuit: De C h r is ti t e n t a t i o n e , 'Ductus e s t Jesus in d esertu ro .’ " Another work a t t r i b u t e d to Achard of S t. V ic to r was c a t a logued a cen tu ry l a t e r by John Leland in h is C o lle c ta n e a # w ith a more s p e c i f i c re fe re n c e : "Achardus quid (ut a p p a re t) ex B ry d lin g to n a , Canonicus, s c r i p s i t : De t r i n i t a t e . " Both c a ta lo g u e s — th a t o f "Boston of Bury" and Leland — were reassem bled by John Bale in 1557.3 In 1619 B a le ’s m a t e r ia l was am p lified by Jean P i t s , who r e f e r r e d to Achard as "Achard of B r id lin g to n ," which he d e sc rib e d as being lo c a te d in the region n o rth of th e Hum b e r ( " p a t r i a n o rth u m b re n s is " ). G abriel P e n n o tti w rote sev e r a l y e a rs l a t e r : "Vigesimum secundum ^ o n a s te r i u m a n g lic a n - um/ S. M ariae de B rig d lin to n a in d io e c e si Elboracensi. . .ex hoc m o n asterio p ro d ie ru n t in prim is Achardus. . .p o s te a S. 3. Scriptorum i l l u s t r i u m m ajo ris B r ita n n ia e . . . cata lo g u s ( B a s le ,1557")”! The l a t e s t e d itio n of t h i s com pilation was p rep ared by R .L.Poole and M,Bateson (O xford,1902). 89 V ic to r ia P a r i s i e n s i s abbas. The t r a d i t i o n of a Norman o r ig in f o r Achard of S t. V ic to r does not seem to have begun u n t i l the l a t e six te e n th cen tu ry w ith Jean ^ ic a rd . P icard was a V ic to rin e canon engaged in compiling the h is t o r y of the P ari3 abbey. P i c a r d ’s Catalogue des Abbez de Ca i n c t - V i c t o r was p u b lish ed in 1612 by Jacques du B reul, a r e l ig i o u s of S t. Germain-des - P r e s . The catalogue s t a t e s th a t Achard was " n a t i f de la vicomte de Dornfront, en Normandie, et de l'a n c ie n n e fa m ille de P etru s A c h a r d ."5 A l a t e r and c o n sid e rab ly augmented e d itio n of Jacques du Bruel was produced by Claude Malingre. I t c o n ta in s a more d e t a i l e d Catalogue than th a t of P icard ; t h i s one is a t t r i b u t e d to John of Toulouse, canon and h i s t o r i a n of S t. V ic to r, who had been P i c a r d 's stu d e n t and d isc i p l e .6 John of Toulouse produced two major h i s t o r i c a l works, the Annales a b b a tia le s e c c le s ia e S an cti V ic to ria P a r is ie n - 4. P e n n o tti, G eneralis t o t j u s s a c r i Ordines clericorum can- onicorum H is to r ia t r i p a r t i t a (Rome,1624),p.380. 5. Jacques du B reul, Theatre des A n tiq u ite z de P a ris (P a ris 1 6 1 2 ),p . 409. 6. Claude M alingre, Les A n tiq u ite z de la v i l l e de P a ris ( P a r i s ,1 6 4 0 ) , p p .448-449. 90 nea and the Antiquitatuxn r e g a lia a b b a tia e S ancti V ic to r is l i b r i duodecim. Following the example of h is te a c h e r , John r e f e r r e d to "P etru s Achardus" in h is C atalogue. Put in h is Annales, th i s becomes " P e rtin s Achard," or more com p l e t e l y , " n o b ili fa m ilia de P e r tin s A chard."7 L a te r how ev er, in the A n tiq uitaturn, John r e f e r s to the "antiqua. fa m ilia P e r t i c i A chardi."8 ''P e r t i c i , " however, would r e f e r to the Perche a re a in th e county of Maine, which would not have been e a a ily confused w ith Dornfront in Nor mandy. The t r a d i t i o n of A chard's Norman o rig in was c a r r ie d on by the brotViers Gc^vole and Louis de Sainte-ftlarthe.9 Around 1700 Gimon Gourdan, a V ic to rin e canon, t r i e d to re c o n c ile the two c o n f l ic ti n g t r a d i t i o n s of th e o r ig in of Abbot Achard. According to th i s h i s t o r i a n , Achard was born in the v isc o u n ty of Dornfront, of which h is f a t h e r was s e ig n e u r . He came from a fam ily th a t was a n c ie n t, n oble, and f u l l of c e le b r a te d p ersonages, in c lu d in g S t. Achard, the se v e n th -c e n tu ry abbot of Jumieges, P e te r Achard (whose i d e n t i t y is unknown), an o th er Achard who founded the p r io r y of canons r e g u la r of Bourg-Achard, and f i n a l l y , a "ric h e 7. M S P a ris B ib lio th e q u e N a tio n a le , L atin 14368,p . 783. 8. M S P a r is B ib lio th eq u e N a tio n a le , L atin 14677,f o .6 0 r . 9 * G a llia C h r i s t i a n a ,IV (1656),925. 91 s ig n e u r de Dornfront" a lso named Achard, founder of the abbey of Loniay in 1026, who was the g ra n d fa th e r of Abbot Achard of S t. V ic to r . Although born in Dornfront, Achard, acco rd in g to t h i s account, was r a is e d in the E n g lish mon a s t e r y "Notre-Dame de B r id lin g to n ." From th e re he en te re d the P a ris abbey of S t. V i c t o r . 10 L a te r h i s t o r i a n s do not seem to know of Gourdan's s ta te m e n ts . Casimir O udinll and l a t e r , the B en e d ic tin es of S t. KaurlS are co n ten t to mention the two c o n f l ic ti n g t r a d i t i o n s w ith o u t d eciding in fav o r of one or the o th e r. In 1750 an o th er attem pt was made to re c o n c ile the two t h e o r i e s . Jacques-G eorges de Chaufpie, in the Nouveau Dic- t i o n n a i r e h i s t o r i q u e et c r i t i q u e , s ta t e d t h a t w hiie Achard was born in Normandy, he would n o n eth eless have been an E n g lish s u b je c t, because the tw e lf th - c e n tu r y duchy was un der th e domination of th e E n g lish k i n g . 13 C h au fp ie's ex- 10. Gourdan, Les v ie s e t les maximes s a in te s des homines i l - l u s t r e s de l 1abbaye de S t-V ic to r de P a r i s , M S P a ris B ib lio th ¥ q u e N a tio n a le , F ra n ^ a is 22396-22401. 11. Oudin, Cominentarius de s c r i p t o r ib u s E c c le sia e a n tiq u a e ( L e ip z ig ,1 7 2 2 ),I I , 1298-1300. 12. G a llia C h r i s t i a n a ,V II l(l7 4 4 ) ,665-666: IX( 1759),481-482. 13. Nouveau D ic tio n n a ire h i s t o r i q u e e t c r i t i q u e pour s e r v i r de supplement ou de c o n tin u a tio n au D ic tio n n a ir e . . .de M. P ie rr e Bayle (Amsterdam,17 5 0 ),1 ,9 3 . 92 p la n a tio n was picked up by L. M o re ri,14 by Aubert de l a Gheanaye D e s b o is ,!5 and f i n a l l y by B. Haureau, who a lso in clu d es Achard among the w r ite r s of M a i n e .16 As might be expected, the h i s t o r i a n s of Dornfront and Normandy have a lso opted fo r the Norman t r a d i t i o n , and are follow ed in t h i s 1 7 by most of the re c e n t b io g ra p h e rs . A c tu a lly , th e r e is nothing in the e a r ly m anuscript t r a d i t i o n t h a t would j u s t i f y the acceptance o f the Norman o r ig in of Achard. I t does not a p ear u n t i l the l a t e s i x te e n th c e n tu ry , whereas the th e o ry of E n g lish o r ig in is much o ld e r. On the o th e r hand, i t could be argued t h a t the o ld e r t r a d i t i o n lacks a solid fo u n d atio n . Furtherm ore, Achard’s proxim ity to the kings of both England and France, as c o n fesso r and s p i r i t u a l a d v iso r, would suggest n o b i l i t y . T Vhen Achard of S t. V ic to r became i t s abbot, the P a ris abbey had alm ost reached the z e n ith of i t s g lo ry . Achard 14. Le grand d i c t i o n n a i r e h i s t o r ique ( P a r i s , 1759 ),1,92. 15. D ic tio n n a ire de l a n o b lesse (P a r i s , 1 7 7 0 ),1 ,2 3 . 16. H is to ir e l i t t ^ r a i r e de la France ( P a r i s ,1 8 7 0 ),X I I I , 453; H is to ir e l i t t ^ r a i r e du Maine ( P a r i s , 1870)p p .1-2. 17. E.Dupont, D ic tio n n a ire d ’hjatoire et geographie e c c l e s i - a s t i q u e , l ( l 9 i 2 ) ,306-307; M .Provost, P lctio n n aT re d e " b i ographic f r a n c a i s o , I (1933),287; M .V ille rs , however, Has some doubts — D ic tio n n a ire de S p i r i t u a l i t y , l( 1937) ,175. 93 wan a well-known and i n f l u e n t i a l personage, and h is p e r sonal p r e s t i g e did much to enhance the p o s itio n of the abbey. lie had been abbot only two y e a rs when the c a th e d ra l c h a p te r of Seez in Normandy req u ested him to be t h e i r b ish o p . Pope Adrian TV confirmed t h e i r ch o ice, but Henry II in te rv e n e d in the e l e c t i o n , p re s s in g the candidacy of Roger, h is c h a p la in . Achard was deprived of the see. L a te r however, r e l a t io n s between the V ic to rin e abbot and the E nglish king became q u ite c o r d ia l. Achard was a b le to use h is in flu en c e a t the E n g lish co u rt to compel Hen r y ’s ro y a l t r e a s u r e r , Richard of E ly, to loosen h is grasp on c e r t a i n moneys he was i l l e g a l l y h o ld in g . Achard saw to i t t h a t the sum was d i s t r i b u t e d among the poor. His l e t t e r to th e king on the m a tte r is e x t a n t . 18 In 1162 Achard of E t. V ic to r was appointed to the v a cant b is h o p r ic of Avranches, and in the same y ear stood as g o d fa th e r to Henry’s daughter E lin o r , who had been born in Normandy a t Dornfront. This in tim a te f rie n d s h ip of Achard w ith the E n g lish king seems to have annoyed Louis V II, who was r e l u c t a n t to allow such a sh in in g l i g h t of the P a r is ia n church to be tr a n s f e r r e d over in to Norman t e r r i t o r y . Vexed, 18. PL,CXCVI,1381-1382 94 he wrote a l e t t e r to the p r io r of S t. V icto r complaining of the s i t u a t i o n . But i t was of no a v a i l . In 1163 Achard of S t. V ic to r , now bish o p of Avranches, was in Kngland a s s i s t i n g in the t r a n s l a t i o n of the remains of S t. Edward the Confessor to ’''estm in ster Abbey. If G ilduin had been the g r e a t a d m in is tr a to r, Achard was the m aster d ip lo m a tis t. He seems to have been j u s t as concerned w ith e c c l e s i a s t i c a l a f f a i r s o u tsid e the P a ris abbey as w ith the in n e r workings of the V ic to rin e commun i t y . Consequently Achard of S t. V ic to r did not have the in te n se personal i n t e r e s t in the school th a t his p re d e c e s so r had had. After a l l , G ilduin had been one of the o r ig in a l d i s c i p l e s of ’Villiam of Champeaux, and was h is s p i r i t u a l and i n t e l l e c t u a l h e i r . Together they had undertaken the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r stew ard sh ip of the id e a l of C hris tia n le a rn in g expressed by H ild e b e rt in h is e p i s t l e . Achard did use h i s p r e s t i g e in e c c l e s i a s t i c a l c i r c l e s to a t t r a c t a c h o la rs to the abbey. He was a very in f lu e n t i a l c l e r i c . One of h is c l o s e s t f rie n d s in f a c t was Thomas & Becket, who v i s i t e d him in P a r is . Such i n d iv id u a ls as P e te r Comestor and Robert of Melun came to S t. Vic t o r to re c e iv e a b a s ic grounding in the a r t s , although they chose no t to become canons. The c e le b ra te d "Master of the Sentences" P e te r Lombard, h im se lf a former stu d e n t 95 a t th e abbey, was in v ite d to r e tu rn and preach th e r e . Achard h im se lf, though a man of many mundane concerns, v/as n o n e th e le ss noted fo r h is i n t e l l e c t u a l a b i l i t i e s . Far from d is d a in in g s c h o la rs h ip , Achard c u ltiv a te d i t v ig o ro u s ly , in h is own p e rso n a l l i f e a t l e a s t . But h is prime con cern was theology r a t h e r than pedagogy or the a r t s p ro p e r. He may w ell have had a p o s itiv e d i s l i k e fo r se c u la r l e a r n ing, or perhaps he f e l t th a t the seven l i b e r a l a r t s had no place in an abbey of canons. For some reaso n , h is p rid e and joy was not the School of S t. V ic to r, but the a u s te re P rem o n straten sian house o f h is own founding. Achard was a most a c tiv e p a r t i c i p a n t in the c h r i s t o l o - g ic a l c o n tr o v e rs ie s of h is day. He wus c ite d long a f t e r h is d eath as a le a d in g a u t h o r it y on the H ypostatic Union. The d o c trin e of the H y p o static Union is th a t in the h i s t o r i c a l f ig u r e o f Jesus of N azareth th e re must be d i s tin g u ish e d two n a tu r e s , a human natu re and a divine N ature; but those two n a tu re s belong to a s in g le Person, and th a t Person is wholly d iv in e . There had been much d isc u ssio n and c o n tro v e rsy on the c h a r a c te r of t h i s union, sparked in the l a t e e le v e n th cen tu ry by R oscelin and p e rp e tu a te d by the te a c h in g s of Abelard and G ilb e rt of la P o rre e . In th e middle of th e tw e lf th century P e te r Lombard sought to c l a r 96 ify th e issu e by s e t t i n g f o r t h in h is B en ten tiae the th re e c l a s s i c a l views on the s u b je c t. The f i r s t th e o ry , i n s i s t i n g on the co ncrete r e a l i t y of C h r i s t 's humanity, held th a t His natu re c o n s is te d of a soul and a body, u n ite d as a re the so u ls and bodies o f a l l men. But t h i s p a r t i c u l a r man is u n ite d by grace to the Word — the second Person o f the T r in ity — and is assumed by th e second Person ("assumptus homo"). Without lo sin g His d iv in e n a tu r e , He assumed to His own divine Person a second human n a tu r e , in which He was born, liv e d on e a r th , and d ie d . This was the view of Hugh and Achard of fit. V ic t o r . The second opinion sought to solve the problem by making a composite of the second Person of the T r i n i t y . The second Person of the T r in ity b efo re the In c a rn a tio n was sim ple; a f t e r th e In c a rn a tio n the second Person is com p o s i t e . This composite Person s u b s i s t s bo th in the div in e and th e human n a tu r e . F i n a l l y , acco rd in g to th e t h i r d view, the second Per son o f the T r i n i t y , in ta k in g on a body and s o u l, simply dons t h i s human n a tu re as a vestm ent, in order t o m anifest Him self to human ey es. However, so u l and body are not u n ite d in Him n a t u r a l ly as in a human b ein g , but are asso 97 c ia te d w ith one a n o th er only because the second Person has donned them sim u lta n e o u sly . This was the view o f P e te r Abelard. Although P e te r Lombard, when s e t t i n g f o r t h th ese th re e p o s i t i o n s , had d e c lin e d to decide fo r any of them, i t was g e n e r a lly thought t h a t he favored the t h i r d view, which had come to be c a lle d " c h r i s t o l o g i c a l n i h i l i s m ." John of Cornwall, archdeacon of W orcester and a form er p u p il of P e te r Lombard, held A belard, the Lombard, and G ilb e rt of la Porr^e re sp o n s ib le f o r the spread of t h i s o p in io n . In h is famous Eulogium ad Alexandrum I I I Papam, composed in 1176, he implored the pope to condemn t h i s t h i r d view of th e H ypostatic Union. Achard of S t. V ic to r was one of the more prominent de fen d ers of the f i r s t or "assumptus homo" th e o ry . In th is he stood sq u a re ly in th e t r a d i t i o n of H ilary o f P o i t i e r s , S t. A ugustine, Pope Leo the G reat, and Anselm of C anter b u ry . A number of tw e lf th - c e n tu r y m a ste rs, l i k e Achard, a lso i n s i s t e d on the "assumptus homo" term inology: W alter of Mortagne, Gerhoh of K eich ersb erg , A chard's te a c h e r Hugh of S t. V ic to r , and l a t e r A chard's pro teg e Robert of Melun. The a b b o t's involvement in the tw e lf th - c e n tu r y c h r i s t o lo g ic a l d is p u te s was not m erely l i t e r a r y . In 1160 a most 98 i n t e r e s t i n g p u b lic d is p u ta tio n took place in P a ris between P e te r Lombard and Robert C rick elad e, an Oxford th e o lo g ia n . Robert informs us th a t he confuted th e Lombard in the p resen ce of two noted a u t h o r i t i e s — Robert of Melun and Achard of S t. V ic to r. Achard’s i n t e r e s t in these c h r i s t o l o g i c a l arguments is amply r e f l e c t e d in h is w r itin g s . He fre q u e n tly a llu d e s to them in h is f i f t e e n e x ta n t sermons. Achard’s magnum o p u s, however, was on th e T r in ity — De T r i n i t a t e : de u n i- t a t e d iv in ae e s s e n tia e e t p l u r a l i t a t e c re a tu ra ru m . In t h i s t r e a t i s e Achard d e a ls w ith the a g e -o ld q u e stio n of the One and th e Many. His e s s e n t i a l theme is t h a t th ere is v e r i ta b ly no r e a l u n ity or p l u r a l i t y in the c re a te d w orld. The only tru e u n ity and p l u r a l i t y is th a t which is in God, u n iq u e ly expressed in the mystery of the T r i n i t y : Three in One, One in Three. P o rtio n s of t h i s t r e a t i s e were to p rovide f u e l f o r "assumptus homo" a p o lo g is ts t i l l th e end o f the cen tu ry . I t was c ite d a t some le n g th by John o f Cornwall in h is Su- logiuro, which is one of our most in fo rm ativ e e x ta n t docu ments on the c o n tro v e rsy . The w r i t e r appealed to a number 19. See Appendix TV. 99 o f a u t h o r i t i e s — Hugh of S t. V ic to r , Maurice of S u lly , and Robert of Melun — but the w eight of h is argument was drawn from the T)e T r i n i t a t e of Achard of S t. V ic to r. The o th e r t r e a t i s e fo r which Achard is known — De d i s c r e t i o n e anim ae, s p i r i t u s e t m entis — - is a lso concerned w ith the q u estio n of u n ity and m u l t i p l i c i t y . The o b je c t of t h i s work is to j u s t i f y the t r i p a r t i t e d iv is io n o f the s o u l, or more p r e c i s e l y , of th e " s u b s ta n tia i n t e r i o r . " The problem posed is the union of t h i s i n t e r i o r su b stan ce w ith th e human body and i t s o p p o sitio n to i t . Achard s e ts out to defin e the terms "anima," " s p i r i t u s , " and "mens," and d e s c rib e s the fu n c tio n s of each of th e se th re e powers. F in a lly , he attem pts to e x p la in j u s t how t h i s d i v e r s i t y or p l u r a l i t y of powers is r e c o n c ila b le w ith the u n ity and s im p l i c i t y of the i n t e r i o r su b sta n c e . There is no doubt th a t Achard of S t. V ic to r occupied a s i g n i f i c a n t p lace in the d o c t r in a l h i s t o r y of the tw e lf th ce n tu ry . In him was to be found th a t r a r e combination of in t e l l e c t , p i e t y , and a d m in is tr a tiv e a b i l i t y which made fo r e x c e lle n t e c c l e s i a s t i c a l le a d e r s h ip . Although the l a s t ten y e a rs of h is l i f e were spent in th e e p is c o p a te , Achard’s c h ie f accomplishment as bishop o f Avranches was the found ing of the P rem o n stra te n sian abbey o f the Holy T r i n i t y a t 100 Lucerne, where in 1171 h is remains were la id to r e s t , a c cording to h is r e q u e s t. D espite A chard's co n sid e rab le a b i l i t y however, i t is c le a r th a t the P a ris abbey of S t. V ic to r had undergone a marked change du rin g h is regime a3 ab b o t, a change which can be regarded as a tu rn in g point in the h is to r y of the school i t s e l f . Por a f t e r Crilduin, no V ic to rin e abbot was to have a d i r e c t concern w ith the development of the school and w ith the p ro p a g a tio n of the Hugonian t r a d i t i o n . There were s c h o la rs and pedagogs to be su re , but th ese f lo u r is h e d a p a r t from, and l a t e r in s p it e o f, the abbot. C onsidering A chard's a t t i t u d e toward s e c u la r le a rn in g , perhaps the only reason the sch o o l - a s ab le to continue during h is regime was t h a t P r io r P a n t i e r , i t s d i r e c t o r , was in f a c t one of the a b b e y 's fo u n d e rs . As the a b b o t's c h ie f a s s i s t a n t , P a n tie r did much to keep a liv e th e ethos o f C h ris tia n s c h o la rs h ip . If Achard had enjoyed the b e n e f its of the l i b e r a l a r t s in h is younger days, as abbot he d e p re c ia te d them, s e t t i n g h is s ig h ts s o le ly on k n o tty th e o lo g ic a l problems. His su c c e sso r as head of th e V ic to rin e c o m m u n i t y 2 0 the infamous 20. A chard's immediate su cc e sso r was h is a s s i s t a n t ITantier, p r i o r of the abbey and the l a s t of the o r i g i n a l Vic- t o r i n e s , but N a n tie r died w ith in s i x months. 101 E rvise — was t o t a l l y unconcerned w ith the i n t e l l e c t u a l and s p i r i t u a l l i f e of the abbey. The p e rp e tu a tio n of th a t C h ristia n humanism fo r which the V ic to rin e s had become famous depended upon l e s s e r men, and e v e n tu a lly f e l l in to abeyance. 102 V II RICHAM) OF ST. VICTOR Perhaps the most famous p u p il of Hugh was th e c e l e b ra te d m y stic , Richard of S t. V ic to r . Richard and Andrew were contem poraries a t the school under the tu te la g e of Hugh, and both were to take up the ta s k of i n s t r u c t i o n a f t e r the g r e a t m aster* 3 d eath . While Andrew went on to become abbot of "/ignore, Richard was to become involved in teach in g a t the P a ris school fo r n e a rly t h i r t y - f i v e y e a r s . During t h i s tim e, h is p u p ils had the b e n e f it of the Vic- uorine i n t e l l e c t u a l t r a d i t i o n as i n te r p r e te d by the l a s t d i r e c t d i s c i p l e of Hugh. All th a t is known f o r c e r ta in of R ic h a rd 's o r ig in is th a t he was a S co t. The date of h is b i r t h remains a mys te r y , as does the d ate of h is appearance on the C ontinent. W e do possess an e p ita p h w r i tt e n in 1348 by William of S t. Ld which s t a t e s "magno tempore v i x i t c a n o n ic u s ." l Another ex ta n t e p ita p h , t h i s one from 1531, a ssu re s us of th e im m o r ta lity of R ic h a rd 's w r itin g s : Nil t i b i Parca fero x n o c u it, quae stam ina parva. Tempore t r a c t a , g ra v i r u p it acerba m anu. 2 1. Recopied by John of Toulouse,MS P a ris B ibliothS que Nat- io n a le , L a tin 14679,f o . 711. 2. Ib id . 103 John of Toulouse concluded from these two e p ita p h s th a t Richard a r r iv e d a t the P a ris abbey r e l a t i v e l y e a rly in h is l i f e . Although Richard has been c l a s s i f i e d f o r y ears s o le ly as a mystic who stood a p a rt from the i n t e l l e c t u a l t r a d i t i o n of the P aris sch o o l, t h i s p ic tu re is badly overdrawn and dangerously m isle a d in g . Hugh e x e rc ise d a pow erful i n f l u ence on R ic h a rd 's th o u g h t. Ouch in flu e n c e could be ex p la in e d only in terms of o ra l i n s t r u c t i o n , the d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p of m aster and p u p il. H is to ria n s such as Bon nard and O ttaviano who have concluded o therw ise lacked th e e n t i r e corpus of R ic h a rd 's works as a b a s is fo r t h e i r judgm ent.3 A more re c e n t b io g ra p h e r, Gervais Dumeige, though h im se lf la c k in g the e n t i r e R ichardian corpus, none th e le s s r e a liz e d R ic h a rd 's tremendous debt to Hugh in the m y stic a l w r itin g s which gained him so much renown.4 Our f i r s t a c tu a l reco rd of R ic h a rd 's a c t i v i t i e s a t the P a r is abbey comes from John of Toulouse, who t e l l s us th a t 3. O ttav ian o , "Riccardo di S. V i t t o r e , La v i t a , le opere, i l p e n s ie r o ," Vemorie d e lla R. Accademia n a z io n a le dei L in c e i, Classe di Bcienze m o ra li, s to r i c h e e t filolcigiche S e r .V I ,v b l.iv ,f a s c .5 .( R o m e ,1933)j and Bonnard, H is t, de l 'a b b a y e . . ,de S t - V i c t o r , c ite d above, 4. Dumeige, Richard de S a in t-V ic to r e t 1 ' id le ch r£ tie n n e d ' amour ( P a r i s ,1952). 104 Richard wag se rv in g in th e c a p a c ity of s u b -p rio r in 1159. Three years l a t e r he succeeded N a n tie r as p r i o r of the abbey of S t. V ic to r. It was th a t same y e a r, 1162, th a t the canons e le c te d as t h e i r abbot E r v is e , a man whose p erso n al w o rld lin e s s proved to be a g re a t th o rn in the sid e of the new p r i o r . The q u a rre l between Abbot E rv ise on the one sid e and P r io r Richard and most of the ch a p te r on th e o th er was to plague th e abbey f o r f u l l y a decade. E rv ise of S t. V ic to r had been born of a noble E n g lish or Norman fa m ily . Kis w ealthy background put him on friend- ly fo o tin g w ith the s e c u la r and e c c l e s i a s t i c a l a r i s t o c r a c y . E rv ise had aided in the e sta b lish m e n t of the f i r s t Vic t o r i n e colony in England, and he founded th e re th e p r io r y of Schobbedon. R eturning to P a r is , E rv ise was e le c te d abbot in 1162, to f i l l th e vacancy caused by A chard's ap pointm ent to the see of Avranches and the untim ely death of N an tier h is s u c c e sso r. E rv ise was a pompous p r e l a t e who enjoyed luxury and o s te n t a t i o n . On the o th e r hand, he was so extrem ely author i t a r i a n as to b rin g upon him self the immediate reproach of Pope Alexander I I I . He was no t w e ll- lik e d by h is own c o n g reg atio n . N e ith e r Richard of S t. V ic to r, who had j u s t 105 bec"me p r i o r of the c o n ,u n ity , nor the s u b -p r io r, wa .lte r, looked too k in d ly on the excesses of Abbot E rv ise . The abbey of S t. V ic to r was faced w ith a grave c r i s i s . On the one hand, we see the abbot as a very im portant man who was th e c lo se f r ie n d of c a r d in a ls , p r e l a t e s , and k in g s, a man who probably committed no nublic f a u l t s but who was not p a r t i c u l a r l y r e l ig i o u s e i t h e r , a man fo r whom in c r e a s ing c o n ta c t w ith the world meant in c re a sin g lo ss of h is c l e r i c a l v o c a tio n . On the o th er hand, we see the ch ap ter led by the o th erw o rld ly kichard and the in tr a n s ig e n t Hub- p r i o r ’' a l t e r , the l a t t e r d e stin e d to succeed S t. Bernard as an im placable foe of heresy in France. I t seems th.it th e abbot of S t. V ic to r was a very in f l u e n t i a l p erso n . S eve raj. c a r d in a ls , ta k in g advantage of h is p roxim ity to Louis V II, asked h is m ediation w ith the king in t h e i r b e h a lf . He was a lso very close to Henry I I of England, and i t was suspected th a t he served each as diplom at and spy in the court o f th e o th e r! Important p e r sons of th e Curis were in co n sta n t c o n ta c t w ith E rv is e . C ard in al Giovanni P in z u ti asked him f o r a V ic to rin e founda ti o n a t N aples, w h ile Alexi Capocci, papal subdeacon, him s e l f decided to take the h a b it of S t. V ic to r a t P a r is . E r v is e re c e iv e d Thomas a Becket a t the P a r is abbey j u s t fo u r months before h is martyrdom. 106 But in the m idst of a l l t h i s a c t i v i t y th e re was deep u n r e s t. F u rtiv e correspndence passed between Pope Alexan d er and the abbot on one hand, and between th e pope and the c h a p te r le d by Richard on the o th e r, W e l-earn from theee l e t t e r s t h a t the abbot was greedy; c o n tra ry to the s t a t u t e s of th e o rd e r, he d i s t r i b u t e d punishments w ithout the con sen t of the c h a p te r; he had no concern fo r c l a u s t r a t i o n , nor did he take pain s to safeg u ard the r e l i g i o u s l i f e of the community; he a l i e n a te d the goods of the monastery with out th e consent of the c h a p te r; he was too concerned w ith b u ild in g ; and he p e rse c u te d s e v e re ly the most pious members of the community. In September 1169, Alexander I I I wrote to W illiam, a rchbishop of Sens, and to Odo of Ourscamp, e n jo in in g them to make a can o n ical v i s i t to the P a ris abbey of S t. v i c t o r and to reform i t . They were empowered to expel any mem b e rs they found u n d e s ira b le and could name a new abbot i f n e c e ssa ry . But d ip lo m atic E rv ise was soon a b le to convince th e envoys of h is good w i l l . In 1170 th e pope c a lle d f o r obedience to Abbot E rv ise and asked Richard and the chap t e r to cooperate w ith the abbot in every way p o s s ib le . In 1172 the a f f a i r had come to a head. By t h i s time th e pope had had enough of diplomacy and d e a l t w ith i t through s t r i c t l y le g a l c h an n els. He d isp a tc h e d th re e pon 107 t i f i c a l commissioners — Archbishop William a g a in , Stephen of La Chapel] e , bishop of lieaux, and the P rem o n stra te n sian abbot of V a ls e r i — who were to conduct an in te n s iv e i n q u iry , and to ta k e any measures they thought n e c e ssa ry to remedy the s i t u a t i o n . He wrote a lso to E rv ise and to the c h a p te r, demanding cooperation w ith th e i n v e s t i g a t o r s , and to King Louis V II, hoping to sever h is clo se a l l i a n c e w ith E rv ise and e n l i s t h is support in the cause of reform . This time th e i n q u i s i t o r s had no tro u b le see in g through the w orld ly a b b o t. They were jo in ed by two c a r d in a ls — A lb ert of S t. Laurent and T h ierry , deacon of San V ita le — who h a p p ily were " ju s t p a ssin g through" P a ris a t the op portune moment on t h e i r way to in v e s tig a te the murder o f Becket a t C anterbury, E rv ise duly o f fe r re d h is r e s ig n a tio n , and re q u e ste d t h a t he be se n t to a r u r a l p r io r y w hile a - w a itin g f i n a l judgment. The community immediately e le c te d a new a b b o t, G uerin, who wa3 confirmed by the pope w ith c o n g r a t u l a t i o n s . The t a l e does not end h e re , however, f o r the c a p r i cio u s E rv ise o f S t. V ic to r was s t i l l a t la r g e . P re te n d in g to have l e f t P a r is f o r th e r u r a l p r io r y , he p i l f e r e d sa c re d r e c e p ta c le s from the c a th e d r a l, absconding w ith th e se and w ith a c o n s id e ra b le amount of s i l v e r which v i s i t i n g Nor wegian A rchbishop E s k il of Lund had e n tr u s te d to him. 108 Maurice of S u lly , bishop of P a r is , r e t r i e v e d the sacred r e c e p ta c le s . But the s i l v e r had a lre a d y been s p e n t. E sk il wrote to Louis VII w ithout a v a i l . F in a lly E s k i l 's su cces s o r Absalon brought a s u i t b e fo re the pope fo r reim burse ment, and the V ic to rin e s of P a ris were made to pay f o r the escapades of t h e i r former ab b o t, who had by t h i s time been s e iz e d . Two y e a rs l a t e r , f a r from the abbey, E rv ise of S t. V ic to r died in o b s c u rity . With Guerin se c u re ly i n s t a l l e d as ab b o t, R ic h a rd 's f a c tio n emerged as the v i c t o r s . This triumph undoubtedly served to stren g th e n R ic h a rd 's i n t e l l e c t u a l in flu e n c e a t th e abbey. He continued to te a c h , and remained p r io r of th e community and d i r e c t o r of the School of S t. V ic to r u n t i l Ws d eath in 1173. W e fin d in R ic h a rd 's l a t e r works d e f i n i t e echoes of th e co n tro v ersy th a t fo r so long had div id ed th e P a ris abbey. I t is mentiond in h is E p is to la ad Severinum de c a r - ita te fi in a m y stical t r a c t e n t i t l e d De s t a t u i n t e r i o r i s h o m in is,6 in the famous Ben.jamin m ajor and m inor, 7 and in th e Super " E x iit edictum A le x a n d ria ." In t h i s last-nam ed 5. PL,CXCVI,1226-1229. 6. PL,CXCVI,1229-1366. 7. PL,CXCVI,1-64,64-192. 109 t r a c t , Richard d isc u s s e s in a l l e g o r i c a l terms the i n t e r v e n tio n of a c e r t a i n Alexander in the a f f a i r s of a com munity of C h ris tia n s on account of the unseemly conduct of i t s le a d e r. The most l o g ic a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of t h i s work, and indeed the common’y accepted one, has been s e t f o rth by ChStilIon in th e most re c e n t e d itio n of it.® This t r a d i t i o n a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the Super "E x iit edictum A lexandris" has been c a lle d in to q u e s tio n , however. Fr. A. Ampe, fo r one, does not r a l l y to the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s e t f o r th in Ch&ti.'Ion's e d itio n of the wcrk.^ Ampe does not id e n tif y Pope Alexander I I I as the "Alexander" a l l e g o r i c a l l y conmsnted upon by R ichard. In h is o p in io n , the Alex ander of whom Richard speaks symbolizes Jesus C h rist; the "Edict of Alexander" has re fe re n c e to the p e r f e c t l i f e , and t h a t as such, i t is addressed to a l l C h r is tia n s . The men tio n of G o lia th , acco rd in g to Ampe, is an a l l u s i o n to th e d e v i l . In a review of the l a t e s t e d itio n of th e c o lle c tio n c o n ta in in g the Edicturn, M. A. Combes reproved C h a tillo n f o r 8. Richard de S a i n t - V i c t o r : Sermons et opuscules s p i r i t u e l s i n ^ d i t s , I . Texte L a tin , in tro d u c tio n e t notes de J, ChSt- i l l o n e t Tr.J .T u llo c h , tra d u c tio n fra n p a is e de J . B arthe- lemy (B ru g e s -P a ris ,1951). 9. A.Ampe,"Het onwitgegenen werk van Richard van S a in t-V ic t o r , " Ons g e e s te li.jk E rf (Antwerp,1 951),p . 289-292. 110 not having s e r io u s ly co n sid e red .tape’s hypothes i s . 10 Fr. t a p e 's i n t e r p r e t a t i o n seemingly would provide an ex p lan a tio n f o r c e r ta in i n t e r n a l problems r a is e d by the t r a c t . But a major d i f f i c u l t y s t i l l remains in the opening words, "E x iit edictum ab Alexandro magno," a play on the e v a n g e li c a l t e x t " E x iit edictum a Caesare Augusto. . . " (Luke 2 :1 ) . T..y would Richard have s u b s t i t u t e d the name Alexander fo r Caesar? The book of Maccabees may have suggested to Richard th a t he s u b s t i t u t e Alexander; but although he c i t e s Maccabees s e v e ra l lin e s a f t e r the opening, he prompt ly f o rg e ts about i t , and i t is not mentioned f u r t h e r . I t would appear r a th e r t h a t i t was the name Alexander which suggested the c i t a t i o n of Maccabees r a t h e r than the r e v e rs e . Prom the b eg in n in g , i t seemed to have been taken f o r g ra n te d th a t Richard was r e f e r r i n g to none o th e r than Pope Alexander I I I . Indeed a t h i r t e e n t h - c e n t u r y m anuscript a t t e s t s to t h i s . ^ As f o r th e re fe re n c e to G o lia th , Rich a r d 's f r ie n d Bernard of C lairvaux had made a s im i l a r a l l u sion t o one of h is a d v e r s a r i e s . Abelard wa8, f o r Bernard, a new G o lia th , as was E rv ise f o r R ic h a rd .12 10. M.A.Combes, "Richard de S a in t- V ic to r , L 'e d i t A lexandre, " Revue d 'h i s t o i r e de l ' e g l i s e de F ran ce,XXXVII(I95l)«90-91. 11. C h a tillo n , O p .c i t . , p .x x x i- x x x ii and p . 4. 12. Bernard of C lairv au x , E p is to la CLXXXIX, ad Innocentium papam I I . I l l The q u estio n of R ic h a rd ’s frie n d s h ip w ith the famous monk of C lairvaux i s a n o th e r th a t has puzzled many scholars. The o ld e s t sources would seem to make them f a s t f r ie n d s . The testim ony is based on two of R ic h a rd ’s t r a c t s , De con- c o rd ia temporum regnum conregnantium super Judam e t super I s r a e l ^3 and the D e c la ra tio n e s nonnullarum d if f ic u lta tu m S c r i p t u r a e ,*4 both of which appear to have been dedicated to Bernard. Two more of R ic h a rd ’s works make e x p l i c i t re fe re n c e to "my dear B ernard," namely the De t r i b u s ap- p r o p r i a t i s p erso n is in T r i n i t a t e ^S and the L iber de Verbo In c a rn a to .16 Dumeige is s k e p tic a l of the d a te of the l a t t e r work; in h is view i t is im possible to determ ine w ith s u f f i c i e n t c e r t a i n t y th a t the De Verbo In carn ato was w r i t ten a n t e r i o r to 1153, the y e a r of S t. B e rn a rd 's death. Du meige 's sk ep ticism i s shared by Ludwig O t t .l ? Ottaviano however is content to accep t the t r a d i t i o n a l view, and i t is c e r t a i n l y f a r from im p la u sib le . A fte r a l l , we know th a t 13. PL,CXCVI,241-248. 14. PL,CXCVI,255-266. 15. PL,CXCVI,991-994. 16. PL,CXCVI,995-1011. 17. O tt, "Untersuchungen zu r th eo lo g isch en B r i e f l i t e r a t u r , " Beitr&ge zur G eschichte der P hilo so p h ie und Theologie des M i t t e l a l t e r s , XXXIV (M onster,1936),549-567. 112 r e l a t io n s were extrem ely amicable between Citeaux and S t. V ic to r. And i t was to the care of the P aris abbey th a t St. Bernard commended h is young pro l e g / , P e te r Bombard. Bernard had been a f r i e n d of G ild u in , and i t should not be s u r p r i s i n g i f he were w e ll-a c q u a in te d w ith b oth Achard and Bichard of S t. V i c t o r . ^8 Since the a n c ie n t t r a d i t i o n p o in ts unanimously to a correspondence between Richard and S t. Bernard, and s in c e no certain p ro o f can be o ffe re d to the c o n tra ry , i t would be 3afe to assume th a t such f r i e n d s h ip did indeed e x i s t . Like Bernard, Richard had a d e f i n i t e m y stic a l b e n t. But also lik e the monk of C lairv au x , he was an a b le th e o lo g ia n . R ic h a rd' 3 p r i n c i p a l th e o lo g ic a l work was on the T r i n i t y . 19 Kis anproach is o n to lo g ic a l, and thus lack s the lo g ic a l p re c is io n of th e l a t e r s c h o l a s t i c s . In Be T r i n i - t a t e Richard re a ffirm e d Anselm's "credo u t i n te llig a m ," s e t t i n g f o r th f a i t h as the n ec e ssa ry p r e r e q u i s i t e of C hris t i a n k n o w le d g e .^ 18. de Warren, "Bernard e t l 'o r d r e de S t - V i c t o r ," Bernard de C lairvaux ( P a r i s ,1953); Vacandard, Vie de s a i n t Ber n a rd , a b b / de C lairv au x ( P a r i s , 1897). 1.9. Be T r i n i t a t e ,PL,CXCVI,887-892. 20. On h is d o c trin e o f knowledge, see Ebner, "Die E rkennt- n i s l e h r e Richards von S t. V ik to r," B e itra g e zu r Gesch- ic h te dee P h ilo so p h ic und Theologie des M i t t e l a l t e r s XIX,4 (Mflnster,1917) 113 He d is c e rn s th re e types of being: E te r n a l and By I t s e l f , not e t e r n a l and not by i t s e l f , and e t e r n a l and not by i t s e l f . Then s t a r t i n g from sense experience he proves t h a t th in g s e x i s t i n g not by them selves have a beginning and end, and hence t h a t they have, a cause. The U ltim ate Cause must be an e t e r n a l and s e lf - s u b s is te n t Being. Richard then proceeds to h is p roof of the tr iu n e c h a r a c te r of the Godhead. The E te r n a l B ather, th e Fount of a l l b e in g , gave u tte ra n c e to a Word, the express image of H im self. And from th ese two P ersons, F ath er and Son, proceeds a t h i r d Person, the Holy S p i r i t : the Love of the F ath e r f o r the Son, and the Son f o r the F ath er i s p e rs o n a l. Thus the T r in ity is com pleted.21 Perhaps the w r itin g s which earned fo r Richard of St. V ic to r the overwhelming — i f u n j u s t i f i e d — r e p u ta tio n as 3 o le ly a m ystic were h is works on co n tem plation. These a re c e r t a i n l y h is best-known w r itin g s . Co m a s te r f u lly did Richard s e t f o rth the contem plative l i f e as the h ig h e st mode of human e x iste n c e th a t subsequent th e o lo g ia n s were to c a l l him "magnus c o n te m p la to r." 21. See de R^gnon, Etudes de th ^ o lo g ie p o s it i v e su r l a sainte T r i n i t y , S e rie s I I , Th?orie3 s c h o la s t i q u e s [ P a r i s , 1892), p . 235-335. Host of R ic h a rd ’s th e o lo g ic a l works a re dis cussed by Ott (O p . c i t . ) , a lth o u g h he erro n eo u sly ascribes De s u p e r e x c e lle n ti baptismo C h r is ti to R ichard. 114 Ilia two g r e a t e s t works on contem plation are known as “ Benjamin Minor ("The P re p a ra tio n of the kind fo r Contem p la tio n " ) and Benjamin Major ("The Grace of Contemplation"), In th ese w r itin g s Richard expresses much i n t e r e s t in the way th a t the r a tio n a l and s u p ra - ra tio n a l f a c u l t i e s combine* not only in the m ystic experience but in every a c t of p e r c e p tio n . Ke is deeply concerned w ith the problem o f know ing God. In the Benjamin t r e a t i s e s , Richard extends the a l l e g o r i c a l comparison o f Leah and Rachel down to t h e i r c h ild re n and to Benjamin. Benjamin, he t e l l s u s, k i l l e d h is mother in o rd e r to r i s e above n a tu r a l reason, in order to achieve the essence of the contem plative s t a t e . P a r t i c u l a r l y in the Benjamin Maj or Richard d isc u sse s the sta g e s through which th e soul p asses in o rd er more p e r f e c t l y to know God. With contem plation comes r e v e la tio n ; a f t e r t h a t , th e double u n v e ilin g of the eyes of the soul and the sub lime Object of t h e i r v i s i o n . But the f i n a l s t a t e is one of unknowing ("excessus m entis" or " e x t a s i s " ) , in which the i n t e l l i g e n c e ceases to fu n c tio n , so absorbed is the soul in i t s C reato r. There has been some disagreem ent among s c h o la rs as to when th ese two g r e a t works were w r i tt e n . Were the Benjamin t r e a t i s e s p ro d u cts of R ich ard ’s e a rly thought, or did he w r ite them w ith th e i n s ig h t of advanced age? Fr. E th ie r 115 has argued t h a t R ic h a rd ’s p o s itio n on s u p r a - r a t i o n a l t r u t h as s e t f o r t h in Ben.jamin Major and Minor d if f e r e d essen t i a l l y fro n the view he expressed in D e_ T r i n i t a t e , composed a t the end of h is l i f e . 22 R ic h a rd 's most re c e n t b io g ra p h er* Dumeige, o b je c ts th a t the De T r i n i t a t e can only be s a id to have been w r i tt e n a f t e r 1148, the d ate of the Council of Rheims. Beyond t h a t , any degree of c e r t a i n t y is impos s i b l e . T V e do know, however, th a t R ic h a rd 's e a r l i e r days a t the abbey were absorbed in lesso n s and in c a rry in g on the tea c h in g s of m aster Hugh. Advancing m a tu rity o fte n c a r r i e s w ith i t an in c re a sin g c o n v ic tio n o f the v a n ity of the w orld. The E rv ise a f f a i r would c e r t a i n l y have s t i r r e d such a c o n v ic tio n in Richard. In any event i t was j u s t b efore h is death t h a t Richard composed an o th er famous m y stical work, the De q u a ttu o r gradibus v i o l e n t i a e c a r i t a t i s .23 in t h i s l i t t l e t r e a t i s e he d isc u s s e s the s o u l 's p u r i f i c a t i o n o f i t s e l f in o rd er to r i s e through s e l f and above s e l f to th e v is io n of God. In the f o u r th and most profound degree of lo v e, "the soul r e serves n othing f o r h e r own w i l l but commits a l l th in g s to God, never th in k in g about h e r s e l f but about the th in g s of Jesus C h ris t, so t h a t she may say: ’ I came not to do my own 22. E t h i e r , Le "De T r i n i t a t e " de Richard de S a in t-V ic to r (P a r i s - OTEawa, lySiJ J . 23. PL,CXCVI,1207-1226. 116 w i l l b u t the w i l l of the F a th e r which is in h e a v e n . ' "24 Even in h is famous a l l e g o r i c a l polemic Super " E x iit edictum A lex an d ria»" d e a lin g w ith the E rv ise a f f a i r , Rich ard c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y in c o rp o ra te s an e x p la n a tio n of the m y stic a l s ig n if ic a n c e of th e p ro c e ssio n s ta k in g p lace on the F east of the P u r if i c a t i o n of the V irg in , Palm Sunday, and Ascension Day. And c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y , Richard in forms h is b re th re n t h a t th e l a s t f e a s t — th e Ascension — s i g n i f i e s th e p e r f e c t mode of l i f e . . . . t h e contem plative s t a t e . Richard of S t. V ic to r , m ystic seemingly to the co re, could not even anathem atize h is old enemy E rv ise f o r long b efo re the love of God would en g u lf him and c a rry him out in to the depths of contem plative e c s ta s y . R ic h a rd 's m y stic a l le a n in g s a lso c o lo r h is d o c trin e of s in and p e n ite n c e . In th e De Verbo In carn ato he p r a is e s O rig in a l Sin as a happy misdemeanor — " f e l i x culpa" —25 which bro u g h t about the In c a rn a tio n of th e S aviour. His De p o t e s t a t e lig a n d i e t s o l v e n d j 2 6 d e a ls more s p e c i f i c a l l y w ith th e s u b je c t. R ic h a rd 's w r itin g s were to in flu e n c e 24. T ra n s la te d by Clare K irc h b e rg e r, Richard o f S t . V i c t o r : S e le c te d W ritings on Contem plation (London,1 9 5 7 X . 25. "0 f e l i x culpa quae talem ac tantum m eruit habere r e - demptorem." PL,CXCVI,1003. 26. PL,CXCVI,1159-1178. 117 l a t e r th e o lo g ia n s , e s p e c ia lly the g r e a t F ranciscan d o c to r S t. Bonaventure Furthermore i t was p rim a rily due to ■Richard’s in flu e n c e th a t the canons of P aris became known not so much as s c h o la rs bu t as p e n i t e n c i e r s . Such V ic t o r i n e c o n fesso rs as Robert of Flamesbury and, more p a r t i c u l a r l y , P e te r of P o i t i e r s (not to be confused w ith the c h a n c e llo r o f th e U n iv e rsity of P a ris ) would echo R ic h a rd ’s t e a c h i n g s .27 However tem pting i t might be to c l a s s i f y Richard s o l e ly as a m y stic , to do so would be to ignore th e o v e r a ll p e rs p e c tiv e o f h i s work, and thus to miss th e r e a l s i g n i f i cance of R ic h a rd ’s p la c e in the V ic to rin e t r a d i t i o n . For a lth o u g h Richard was a m y stic, he was n o n eth eless a s c h o la r l i k e h is m a ste r, Hugh. Like Hugh a l s o , Richard was con cerned w ith pedagogy, emphasizing th e importance of a firm fou n d atio n in the l i b e r a l a r t s which must u n d e r lie knowledge of sacred th in g s . Thus as Hugh had produced h is D ld a s c a li- con de s tu d io le g e n d ! , so Richard produced h is L ib er ex cept ionum, an ex h au stiv e guidebook f o r conducting the can ons through t h e i r program of s e c u la r and sacred s t u d i e s . 28 27. See Anciaux, l a th ^ o lo g ie du sacrament de p g n lta n c a au X lle s iS c le (Louvain,1949)pp.236-242;338-341. 28. Richard de S a in t - V i c t o r , "L iber Rxceptionum" - te x te c r i t i q u e avec in tr o d u c tio n , n o tes e t t a b l e s , p u b lie p a r Jean Ch& tillon ( P a r i s ,1958). 118 U n til r e c e n t y e a r s » the L ib er exceptlonum was not a s c rib e d to R ichard. Haur^au decided t h a t Hugh was c e r t a i n ly th e a u th o r* 29 w h ile two s c h o la rs — M artin and Land- g r a f — a t t r i b u t e d th e t r e a t i s e to P e te r Com estor.30 Ot ta v ia n o co n sid e red th e p o s s i b i l i t y of R ich ard ian authorship* b u t remained s k e p t i c a l . 31 In 1935 an American scholar* P h ilip Moore* a f t e r exhaustive study of a la r g e s e c tio n of th e L ib er exceptionum — namely th e A lle g o ria e on the Old and New Testaments — concluded th a t Richard of S t. V ic to r was indeed th e a u th o r a t l e a s t o f th a t s e c tio n .3 2 i t r e - mained f o r P r. C h d tillo n to d isc o v e r t h a t th e A lle g o ria e were c o n tain ed in th e l a r g e r work, L ib er exceptionum * and t h a t the e n t i r e t r e a t i s e was R ic h a rd 1s . 33 In 1958* having compiled and s tu d ie d the v a rio u s m anuscripts of i t s Com- 29. B.Haur£au* Les oeuvres de Hugues de S a i n t - V i c t o r ; e s s a i c r i t i q u e ( P a r i s 7 l8 8 6 ) ,p .3 3 f f . 30. M artin , "Motes s u r 1*oeuvre l i t t £ r a i r e de P ie rr e le Ifen- g e u r ," Recherche8 de th l o l o g i e ancienne e t m6di£vale* m (1 931),56-57; L andgraf*"Recherches s u r l e s M erits de P ie r r e le Mangeur," RTAM,III (1931),359. 31. O ttav ian o , O p .c i t . , p p .427-429. 32. Moore,"The A uthorship of the A lle g o ria e su p er Vetus e t Novum Testamentum," New S c h o la s tic is m *IX (1935),209-225. 33. C hdtillon*"L e c o n t e n u * l 'a u t h e n t i c i t £ e t l a d ate du Liber exceptionum e t des Sermones centum de Richard de S a in t- V i c t o r ," Revue du moyen 8ge l a t i n , IV (1948), 23-52; 343-366. 119 ponent p a r t s , C h S tillo n p u b lish e d a c r i t i c a l e d itio n of R ic h a rd ’s L ib er exceptionum . The aim of the L iber exceptionum is to s e t f o r t h th a t knowledge which is n e cessary f o r a w e ll-b a la n c e d under sta n d in g of Holy S c r ip tu r e . The t r e a t i s e is d iv id ed in to two p a r t s . The f i r s t s e c tio n , on p rofane le a r n in g , is made up of ten books: the f i r s t two d eal w ith p hilosophy, th e t h i r d w ith geography, and the rem aining s ix w ith h i s to r y . Once th ese d i s c i p l i n e s have been m astered , the s t u dent proceeds to the s u b je c t m a tte r of the second p a r t , or Holy S c r ip t u r e . The f i r s t nine books c o n ta in an a l l e g o r i - c a l commentary on the p r i n c ip a l h i s t o r i c a l books of the Old Testam ent. Book te n c o n s is ts of some tw enty-seven s e r mons on th e B ib le , w hile the l a s t f iv e books d eal w ith various e v a n g e lic a l t e x t s from th e New Testament. The work is h a rd ly o r i g i n a l . Like Hugh, Richard draws much m a te r ia l from the a n c i e n t s : A ugustine, B oethius, C assiodorus, Gregory, I s id o r e , Bede, and Hhabanus Maurus. He also borrows h e a v ily from Hugh — - n o ta b ly from th e Didas- c a lic o n , th e De Sacrament i s , and th e Le s c r i p t i s e t s c r i p t - o rib u s s a c r i s . In a d d itio n he e x t r a c t s much h i s t o r i c a l m a te r ia l — d a tin g from King Saul to the e a r ly C apetians — from the Chronicon o f Hugh of P le u ry . 120 Richard opens th e work on a t e l e o l o g i c a l note to dem o n s tr a t e the u ltim a te reason f o r the e x iste n c e of h is t r e a t i s e . Han, he a rg u e s, has been made in th e image and lik e n e s s of God. Man was c re a te d in God's image through th e g i f t of th e f a c u lty of re a so n , and he was c re a te d in God's lik e n e s s by the g i f t of f r e e w i l l . And th ese g i f t s p o in te d to p e r f e c tio n and im m o rta lity , f o r by h is reason man could re a c h a knowledge of t r u t h , and by h is w i l l man could achieve a love of v i r t u e . Unhappily s in was i n t r o duced in to mankind w ith Adam's d iso b e d ie n c e . With th e f i r s t man's s in , c o rru p tio n and d eath came in to th e w orld. No lo n g e r did th e human w i l l and reaso n tu rn spontaneously toward v i r t u e and t r u t h . Thus i t is n ece ssa ry f o r man to r e tu r n to God. And to do t h i s he must pass through th re e le v e l s o f a tta in m e n t: f i r s t , he fin d s some remedy f o r h is human i n f i r m i t i e s through the m echanical a r t s ; he a t t a i n s v i r t u e through p r a c t i c a l p h ilosophy; and f i n a l l y , he a t t a i n s wisdom through t h e o r e t i c a l p h ilo so p h y .34 A fte r s e t t i n g f o r t h th e te le o lo g y of the A r i s t o t e l i a n d iv is io n of knowledge, Richard proceeds to an e x p o s itio n of th e a r t s them selves, borrowing h e a v ily from Hugh's P id a s - 34. "Propter i s t a autem t r i a remedia invenienda in v e n ta e a t omnis a r s e t omnis d i s c i p l i n a . P ro p te r inveniendam nam- que sap ie n tiam in v en ta e s t t h e o r i c a . P ro p te r inveniendam v irtu te m in v en ta e s t p r a c t i c a . P ro p te r inveniendam nec- e s s ita te m in v e n ta e s t m ech a n ic s." ( L i b . I , c a p . v ) . 121 c a l i c o n . There a re seven m echanical a r t s . On th e second le v e l a re th e p r a c t i c a l a r t s . The t h i r d realm encompasses t h e o r e t i c a l p h ilo so p h y . U nlike Hugh, Richard does not c i t e the a n c ie n t a u th o r i t i e s which a re to be c o n su lted in o rd er to m a ste r th e se a r t s . On the o th e r hand, he ex p lain s each d i s c i p l i n e , and s e ts f o r t h th e r a t i o n a l e f o r the study of each. The o ver a l l goal of R ic h a rd 's t r e a t i s e is to dem onstrate t h a t c e r t a i n d i s c i p l i n e s a re n e c e s s a r ily e n ta ile d in a h e a lth y , w e ll-b a la n c e d u n d e rsta n d in g of S c r ip tu r e : " .. .p a u c a v e l n u lla simpflicitati tu e s a c re S c rip tu re lectionem in g r e d ie n t! n e c e s s a r ia p r e te r m ittim u s ."35 R ic h a rd ’s a t t i t u d e toward th e a n c ie n t a u t h o r i t i e s — pagan and C h r is tia n — is s ta t e d s u c c in c tly in a sermon contained in P a rt Two of the t r e a t i s e . In t h i s sermon, he c i t e s th e g r e a t a u t h o r i t i e s by name, g iv in g us an in d ic a tio n of th o se most o fte n used a t the School o f S t. V ic to r a f t e r m id -c e n tu ry : f o r grammar, P r is c ia n ; d i a l e c t i c , A ris t o t l e ; r h e t o r i c , C icero; fo r p r a c t i c a l p h ilo so p h y , P la to and S o c ra te s; f o r th e quadrivium , B oethius, o r a t l e a s t t r e a t i s e s commonly a t t r i b u t e d to him; f o r m edicine, Hippo- 3 5 . P r o lo g u e . 122 c r a t e s and Galen; f i n a l l y , in the realm of th eo lo g y , Jerome f o r w r itin g s on Sacred S c r ip tu r e , Augustine fo r re a so n in g , and on m o ra lity , Gregory th e G reat. I f a man should m aster a l l th e works of a l l of th ese a u t h o r i t i e s , s t i l l i f he has not f e a r of the Lord, then he has not w is dom: "Magnus namque, qui in v e n it sapientiara e t s c ie n tia m , sed non super timentem D o m i n u m . "36 However Richard a ls o makes i t p l a i n th a t i f a man f e a r the Lord, then he w i l l by no means shun le a r n in g . He c le a r ly i l l u s t r a t e s t h i s in h is i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the p a ra b le of th e t a l e n t s (Matthew 2 5 :1 4 -3 0 ). In t h i s a lle g o r y Richard sees th e fiv e t a l e n t s as the knowledge a t t a i n a b l e from th e e x p erien ce of the f iv e sen ses; the two t a l e n t s s ig n if y i n t e l l e c t and good works; tfce s in g le t a l e n t r e p re s e n ts i n t e l l e c t a lo n e . M u ltip lic a tio n of the t a l e n t s r e s u l t s from the e x e rc is e o f v i r t u e and th e p r a c t i s e of good works. The s e rv a n t who b u rie d h is t a l e n t in the ground however s i g n i f i e s th o se f a l s e C h ris tia n s who accep t the g i f t of d iv in e knowledge w ithout u t i l i z i n g and developing i t . R ich ard ’ s a t t i t u d e toward le a r n in g r e c a l l s t h a t of m aster Hugh: "Not knowing, to be s u re , sp rin g s from weakness; b u t contempt of knowledge sp rin g s from a wicked w i l l . "3? Thus we see t h a t 36. Secunda p a r s , lib .X , c a p .x . 37. D id a sc a lic o n , P rologus. (Taylor t r a n s l a t i o n , p . 43) 123 R ic h a rd*9 L ib er exceptionum f a l l s sq u arely w ith in th a t t r a d i t i o n which perhaps may b e s t be d esc rib e d as C h ris tia n humanism. I t has been suggested t h a t th e Liber exceptionum , t o g e th e r w ith P e te r Comestor*s H is to ria s c h o l a s t i c a , were intended as an ensemble which would c o n s t i t u t e a manual f o r th e study of Holy S c r ip tu r e . The Comestor would devote h is w r itin g to th e l i t e r a l s e n se , w hile Richard would expound the a l l e g o r i c a l se n se . This argument, advanced by C. A. Robson,38 is based on the f a c t t h a t m anuscripts o f th e H is to r ia s c h o la s t i c a and o f the A lle g o ria e in Vetus e t Novum Testamenturn o fte n tu rn up to g e th e r . From t h i s he concluded t h a t a s o r t of l i t e r a r y u n ity , or p e c i a , was i n ten d ed . 39 on the face of i t t h i s th e s is p r e s e n ts no g r e a t problem s. P e te r Comestor was dean of the church of N o tre- Dame de Troyes, and in 1164 became c h a n c e llo r of th e c a th e d r a l a t P a r is . He a ls o enjoyed e x c e lle n t r e l a t i o n s w ith th e abbey of S t. V ic to r. The d i f f i c u l t y l i e s w ith the p e c i a . In the f i r s t p la c e , such a method of com position and t r a n s c r i p t i o n was 38. Robson, "The P ecia o f th e Tw elfth-Century P a ris School," Dominican S t u d i e s , I I (1949), 267-279. 39. See D e stre s, La "P e c ia " dans le s m anuacrits u n i v e r s i - t a i r e s du X H Ie e t du XlVe s lE c le ( P a r i s , 1935). 124 not in g e n e ra l use u n t i l the middle or the end o f the t h i r t e e n t h c e n tu r y .40 Secondly, th e ch a p te rs o f the A lle g o ria e sim ply do not correspond to those o f the H i s t o r i a . In o rd e r fo r such c o lla b o r a tio n to have taken p la c e , th e re must needs be a d d itio n a l ch a p te rs of the A lle g o r ia e . But i f Richard composed any more, we have no in d ic a tio n of t h e i r e x i s t e n c e . Ju st a s th e re is danger in c l a s s i f y i n g Richard as s o le ly a m y stic , i t is a ls o m islead in g to c h a r a c te r iz e h is ex eg esis as s o le ly a l l e g o r i c a l . The e x e g e tic a l works t r a d i t i o n a l l y a s c rib e d to Richard a re on the C a n tic le of Can t i c l e s , E z e c h ie l, and on the Apocalypse. In a d d itio n to t h e s e , however, th re e commentaries on Nahum, J o e l, and Obediah should a ls o be c r e d ite d to him. The commentary on Nahum was a s c rib e d to J u lia n of Toledo by Henri Canislus, w r itin g in th e s ix t e e n t h cen tu ry . Dorn Wilmart dem onstrated the V ic to rin e o r ig in of th e work, b u t thought i t should be a t t r i b u t e d to Hugh.41 Wilmart emphasized the d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p of t h a t commentary w ith th e one on J o e l which bore Hugh's name. Morin, in a l a t e r 40. C h S tillo n , L iber exceptionuro, in tr o d u c tio n , p . 80. 41. W ilm art, "Le commentaire su r le prophfete Nahum a t t r i b u S k J u lie n de Toledo," B u l l e t i n de l i t e r a t u r e e c c l f s i - a s tiq u e (1922) p p .253-2*79. 125 a r t i c l e * noted t h a t John B a le ’s Index B rita n n ia e scrip to ru m had a s c rib e d b o th commentaries to R ic h a rd .42 Since then B eryl Smalley has found th a t B a le 's Index was l i t t l e more than a re p ro d u c tio n o f the Registrum l i b - rorum Angllae compiled a t th e beg in n in g of the f o u rte e n th cen tu ry by the s o - c a lle d John Boston o f Bury, and "B ury's" a u th o r ity should be regarded w ith a c e r t a i n degree of c a u tio n . However, Smalley a ls o d isco v ered a t h i r t e e n t h - c e n tu ry m anuscript c o n ta in in g a l l th re e of th e commentaries — Nahum, J o e l, and Obediah — which a t t r i b u t e s them ex p l i c i t l y to R i c h a r d . 43 yet in s p it e o f t h i s testim o n y , Smalley s t i l l th in k s th a t th e commentaries r i g h t f u l l y b e long to Hugh. This i s based on the arguments from i n t e r n a l c r i t i c i s m m arsh alled by W ilmart. But W ilm art's i n t e r n a l c r i t i c i s m was based on comparison of th e commentaries w ith the Exceptiones p r i o r e s , a work he had thought to be Hugh's but which in r e a l i t y is R ic h a r d 's . So th a t in proving th e r e l a t i o n s h i p of th e works, Wilmart was a c t u a l l y d em o n strat ing th a t Richard was indeed th e a u th o r of the th re e b i b l i c a l commentaries. 42. Morin, "Le commentsire s u r Nahum du P se u d o -Ju lie n , une oeuvre de Richard de S t-V ic to r? " Revue b6n4& ictine,XXXVII (1925),404-405. 43. Sm alley, The Study of th e Bible in th e Middle Ages (No t r e Dame, 1964), p.97n.» p p .117-118. 126 Here a g a in , we see from the easy confusion of Rich a r d ’s work w ith t h a t o f Hugh how m islead in g the t r a d i t i o n a l view of Richard was. More and more we d isc o v e r th a t Rich ard did not concern h im se lf s o le ly w ith an a l l e g o r i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of S c r ip tu r e , hu t aimed f o r th e s o lid e s ta b lish m e n t of th e l i t e r a l se n se , in accordance w ith th e te a c h in g s of Hugh. Only then did he r i s e to a lle g o r y . In view of t h i s i t seems iro n ic to f in d Richard in disagreem ent w ith a n o th e r of Hugh's p u p i l s , Andrew of S t. V ic to r , over th e l a t t e r ' s l i t e r a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of I s a i a s . Richard wrote h is famous De E m m a n u e l e * ^ e x p re ss ly to con fu te Andrew. This u n f o rtu n a te ly has been s u b je c t to a c e r t a i n amount of m i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n . The i n t e l l e c t u a l clim a te of th e School of S t. V ic to r, u n lik e other schools o f i t s day, was such t h a t s c h o la rs could and did m ain tain c o n ta c t w ith ra b b in ic th e o lo g ia n s . Andrew of S t. V ic to r in p a r t i c u l a r had made c o n sid e ra b le use o f th e se Jewish so u rc e s. But i f Andrew was a l i t e r a l i s t , so a ls o was R ichard. Indeed Richard h im se lf d e c la re s t h a t he co n su lted Jew ish w r i ti n g s , w ith th e a id of ra b b in ic s c h o la r s , and t h a t he u s u a lly found no l i t e r a l c o n tr a d ic tio n between the C h ris tia n w r itin g s and t h e i r s : " . . . p e r Judeos Judeorum s c r i p t a c o n s u lu i, e t tarn eorum s c r i p t s quam n o s tr a in unam 4 4 . PL, CXCV1,6 0 1 -6 6 6 . 127 sententian) c o n c u rre re d i d i c i . " 45 Andrew, expounding I s a i a s ' te x t "Ecce Virgo concipiet," re p o rte d the e x p lic a tio n s of C h ristia n and Jewish a u th o r i t i e s r e s p e c t i v e l y . R ic h a rd 's o b je c tio n was not on account of Andrew's l i t e r a l e x p l i c a t i o n , but r a th e r because Andrew lacked th e o lo g ic a l e x a c titu d e . For Andrew had concluded h i s d is c u s s io n of th e passage w ithout d eciding between the C h r is tia n and Jew ish i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s . That i s , he de c lin e d to decide w hether I s a ia s was r e f e r r i n g to the Mo t h e r of the S aviour or w hether th e prophet was r e f e r r i n g to hiB own w ife , as indeed the l i t e r a l ra b b in ic i n t e r p r e t a tio n would h o ld . I t was t h i s then th a t occasioned the writ ing of the po lem ical Emmanuele, a t r e a t i s e addressed to the Jews. R ic h a rd 's theme was t h a t the Jews re fu s e to recog n ize in the "Ecce Virgo c o n c ip ie t" a prophecy of the In c a r n a tio n of the Son of God. F ar from being an a n t i - l i t e r a l - i s t , Richard has been c a lle d by Spicq and e s p e c ia lly by Smalley one of th e m a ste rs and perhaps one o f the founders o f th e s c i e n t i f i c ex e g e sis of the tw e lf th cen tu ry . 45. De Concordia temporum regum conregnantiuro super Judam e t super I s r a e l , l o c . c i t . ,241-B. 46. Spicq, E sq u isse d 'une h i s t o l r e de l'e x e g ^ s e l a t i n e au moyen Sge ( P a r is , 1944); Smalley, The Study of th e Bible in th e Middle Ages (Notre Dame, 19647. 128 Thus i t becomes c l e a r th a t Richard did indeed fo llo w the f o o ts te p s of h is m a ste r, Hugh of S t. V ic to r . Even h is m y stic a l w r itin g s b e a r the Hugonian stamp, as Dumeige has ably dem onstrated. Richard was not m erely the v i s i b l e head of th e abbey sc h o o l, but t r u l y th e c o n tin u a to r of th e d i d a c t i c t r a d i t i o n which had c h a r a c te r iz e d th e School of S t. V ic to r from i t s in c e p tio n . I f Richard was a m y stic, he was a ls o a m a ste r. I f he was a p re a c h e r, he was a ls o a pedagogue. W e must acknowledge t h a t lik e W illiam of Champeaux, G ild u in , and Hugh, Richard of S t. V ic to r r e p r e se n te d th e V ic to rin e s p i r i t of a sound, w ell-rounded C h r is tia n humanism. 129 V III GODFREY OF ST. VICTOR Among th e l a t e V ic to rin e s c h o la r s , one o f the most i n t e r e s t i n g is Godfrey of S t . V ic to r . He is a key f ig u r e in th e i n t e l l e c t u a l t r a n s i t i o n which took p la c e in the P a ris school during the l a t e t w e lf th cen tu ry . Godfrey of S t. V ic to r has been th e s u b je c t of con j e c t u r e and c o n tro v e rsy . For a long time th e name "Gode- f r o i " was confused w ith "G eo ffro i" and hence the a c t i v i t i e s of Godfrey of S t. V ic to r were confused w ith th o se of Geof fre y of B r e t e u i l , s u b -p r io r of Sainte-B arbe-en-A uge in the dio cese of L is ie u x . Because o f t h i s co n fu sio n , i t was thought t h a t Godfrey was one of th o se c a lle d to P a r is to help a d ju d ic a te th e m a tte r o f Abbot E r v is e . The atmosphere a t th e p r io r y of S ainte-B arbe had not been p le a s in g to him, o r so h i s w r itin g s in d ic a te d , and a f t e r h is so jo u rn in P a r is , Godfrey spend some time w ith the P rem o n stra te n sian s in Normandy. A s h o rt w hile l a t e r , he r e t i r e d to the P a ris abbey of S t. V ic to r . G eoffrey of B r e te u il may w e ll have been c a lle d from h is p o s t a t S ainte-B arbe to h e lp so lv e th e co n tro v e rsy caused by E rv ise of S t. V ic to r . As s u b - p r io r , Geoffrey 130 had charge of th e l i b r a r y a t S ain te-B arb e. The p o lic y of th e p r io r y governing the a c q u is itio n o f profane works was most d is p le a s in g to G eo ffrey , and e v e n tu a lly he was compelled to leav e S ain te-B arb e. But t h i s Geoffrey in q u e stio n had n o th in g to do w ith Godfrey, canon and f i n a l l y s u b -p r io r of S t. V ic to r. Dorn B r ia l noted th e d i s t i n c t i o n between Godfrey and Geoffrey in 1820.1 The forem ost modern a u t h o r it y on God f r e y , P h ilip p e Delhaye, has attem pted to tra c e th e con fu sio n which, d e s p ite B r i a l , p e r s i s te d in to the tw e n tie th c e n tu r y .2 The source of the e r r o r seems to have been in a se v e n te e n th -c e n tu ry m an u scrip t, fo r e a r l i e r h i s t o r i a n s are q u ite c l e a r . John of Toulouse, the f i r s t V ic to rin e h i s t o r i a n , t e l l s us o f "Godefridus" who was the a b b ey 's s u b -p r io r and who wrote the Microcosmus.3 Godfrey was born around 1125. Prom 1140 to 1150 he was a stu d e n t o f the a r t s in P a r is , a c lo se f rie n d of 1. B r i a l , "G eofroi, s o u s - p rie u r de S ainte-B arbe e t Godefroi, chanoine r e g u l i e r de S t-V ic to r de P a r i s , " H is to ir e l i t - t ^ r a i r e de l a P ran ce,XV ( P a r i s ,1820), 6 9 f f . 2. See the rem arkable and thoroughly undocumented study by R .G riv eau ,"G eo ffro i de S t-V ic to r e t l a decadence des Vic- to r i n e s a la f in du X lle 8 ifecle,"P o s itio n s des t h e s e s , Ecole N a tio n a ls des C h artres ( P a r i s , 1903). 3. A n tiq u ita tu m , L ib .V ,c a p .1. 131 Stephen of Tournai, and one-tim e d i s c i p l e of Adam of P e t i t - Pont. From 1150 to 1155 he s tu d ie d th eo lo g y , and en te re d th e abbey of S t. V ic to r as a r e g u la r canon between 1155 and 1160. Godfrey can r i g h t l y be c a lle d a t r a n s i t i o n a l fig u re a t th e abbey of S t. V ic to r . In h is Fons p h ilo so p h is e he g iv e s us a curious view of th e s t a t e o f le a rn in g a t the P a r is schools in g en eral and, by in fe re n c e , a t S t. V ic to r in p a r t i c u l a r . His view of what r i g h t l y should comprise a l i b e r a l curriculum in th e a r t s is s i g n i f i c a n t l y d i f f e r e n t from th e views h eld by Hugh and R ichard. The a rs mechanics a re f o r Godfrey the "seven i l l i b e r a l a r t s , " h e lp f u l only to the g ro ss and v u lg a r elem ents of the p o p u la tio n and c e r t a i n l y not to be c u l t i v a t e d by an edu c a te d p erso n . The tru e fo n t o f the l i b e r a l a r t s is the triwimw and quadrivium . The triv iu m however has f a l l e n upon hard tim es. In the a rea o f grammar, Ponatus — the g r e a t m aster — has been rep laced by P r is c i a n , A p o llo n iu s, and H erodian, C ic e ro ’s d iv is io n of a re r h e t o r i c s in to f iv e p a r t s have s t i f l e d tru e eloquence. And the w orst tra g ed y o f a l l f o r the triv iu m i s t h a t d i a l e c t i c now re ig n s supreme because o f the in c re a s in g in flu e n c e o f A r i s t o t l e and Por phyry. This e le v a tio n o f d i a l e c t i c , says Godfrey, has 132 given r i s e not only to th e R e a lis t-N o m in a lia t c o n tro v e rsy , bu t to the h e r e s ie s of G ilb e r t of l a Porr£e and A lb eric of T r o is - F o n ta in e s . A fte r the triv iu m comes the second d iv is io n of studies* T h e o re tic s and P r a c t i c a . Of the t h e o r e t i c a l d i s c i p l i n e s , theology is the h ig h e s t, and Godfrey h i n t s t h a t only a t th e School o f S t. V ic to r is i t s u f f i c i e n t l y re sp e c te d as a d i s c i p l i n e . The o th e r t h e o r e t i c a l a r t s are ph y sics and mathe m a tic s, th e l a t t e r encompassing th e t r a d i t i o n a l quadrivium . He speaks as though a r i th m e t i c , m usic, geometry, and a stro n - omy were widely ta u g h t and e q u a lly developed as d is c ip lin e s , although he makes no mention of s p e c i f i c a u t h o r i t i e s studied. Such knowledge of th e te a c h in g of music and astronomy in p a r t i c u l a r would have been most i n t e r e s t i n g and h e lp f u l to u s. Godfrey does, however, lament th e steady advance of the A lg o ris ts upon the a n c ie n t a r t of a r ith m e tic . F in a lly Godfrey tu rn s to the P r a c t i c a , s t r e s s i n g Soc r a t e s and Seneca as a u t h o r i t i e s in th e f i e l d of e t h i c s . This proved to be th e canon's f a t a l e r r o r , f o r Seneca was an odious name to th e p r i o r of the abbey, W alter of S t. V ic to r. The f a c t t h a t Godfrey concluded h is Fons p h ilo - sophiae w ith a w eighty s e c tio n on th e Old and New T e sta m ents, th e F a th e rs , S t. A u g u stin e 's Rule, and the founding of the V ic to rin e canons made no d if f e r e n c e to h is i n t r a n 133 s ig e n t s u p e r io r . W a lte r’s a n tip h ilo s o p h ic t r e a t i s e , Con- t r a qu atu o r la b y r in th o s F ra n c ia e , c o n ta in s some extrem ely p o in ted comments on Godfrey and h is poem. The i l l - f e e l i n g thus engendered le d to p e rse c u tio n and e x ile f o r G o d f r e y . 4 Godfrey’s tre a tm e n t a t the hands of th e abbey’s p r i o r i s a sudden and c e r t a i n l y r a th e r s t a r t l i n g in d ic a tio n of th e d e c lin e of th e abbey sch o o l. Godfrey, a f t e r a l l , had been a p u p il of Richard — the l a s t t r u l y g r e a t re p re s e n t a t i v e o f th e V ic to r in e t r a d i t i o n . Now in th e wake of h is d e a th , R ic h a rd 's most prom ising p u p il was rebuked by h is e rs tw h ile a s s i s t a n t . The p assin g o f an in d iv id u a l such as Richard o fte n le a v e s a hollow t h a t i s im possible to f i l l . The headship of the abbey school was probably l e a s t of th e accomplishments o f R ichard of S t. V ic to r , th e profound m ystic and s c h o la r . But f o r h is su cc e sso r W alter, th e p r i o r a t e was e v e ry th in g . The h e ig h ts which Richard had commanded th ro u g h h is i n t e l l e c t were In a c c e s s ib le to Walter, whose only re so u rc e was h is very s tro n g w i l l . Perhaps he re se n te d G o d frey 's i n t e l l e c t u a l and a r t i s t i c a b i l i t i e s , or perhaps he fe a re d th e canon as a p o s s ib le s u c c e sso r to head th e sc h o o l. At any r a t e , in 1180 Godfrey of S t. V ic to r r e t i r e d to a country p r io r y , where he liv e d f o r s e v e ra l 4 . Fons p h i l o s o p h i s e . Texte p u b li£ e t ann o t£ p ar P. Michaud. Quantin ( L i l l e , 1956). 134 y e a rs in s o li t u d e , u n t i l W a lte r’s w rath had cooled and old wounds had had time to h e a l. Some time a f t e r h is r e tu r n to S t. V ic to r , Godfrey was made s u b -p r io r of the community. Godfrey’ s l i t e r a r y outp u t was r e l a t i v e l y s p a rs e . Of th e works he did produce, however, perhaps th e most r e markable was the Preconlum August i n i , a panegyric on the p h ilo s o p h ic a l and th e o lo g ic a l works of S t. A u g u stin e .5 G odfrey's method was to p arap h rase s e v e ra l passages from th e s a i n t ' s w r i ti n g s , connecting them by means of h is own in te r s p e r s e d comments. The f i r s t t h i r d of th e poem d eals w ith A u g u stin e's c r i t i c i s m of the Manichaean concept of e v i l ; th e middle t h i r d s e t s f o r t h the d o c trin e of the two c i t i e s ; and th e l a s t s e c tio n p ara p h ra se s some of Augus t i n e ' s arguments f o r the r e s u r r e c ti o n o f th e body. In t h i s work, Godfrey e x h ib its c o n sid e ra b le s k i l l in s e t t i n g f o r t h th e ideas o f S t. A ugustine. The poem not only shows a g r e a t f a m i l i a r i t y w ith th e i n t r i c a c i e s of A ugustinian th o u g h t, but an a b i l i t y to s e t f o r t h c l e a r l y f o r h i s re a d e rs th e p o s itio n s most c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the g r e a t f i f t h - c e n t u r y th e o lo g ia n . 5. P h ilip Damon, e d ., "The Preconium A ugustini of Godfrey o f S t. V ic to r ," Mediaeval S tu d ie s ,XXII (1 9 6 0 ).9 2 ff. 135 In a d d itio n to the Eons p h ilo so p h ise and the Precon- ium A u g u s tin i, Godfrey a ls o produced a number of sermons.® Quite a few of them d eal w ith the events surrounding the N a tiv ity . Another of G odfrey's f a v o r i t e s u b je c ts was the Blessed Virgin* and among h is e x ta n t sermons a re those on h er n a tiv ity * p u r if i c a t i o n * and assum ption. S t. Stephen* S t. V ic to r , and S t. Augustine a lso served Godfrey as ex amples to be used in h is h o m ilie s. In a d d itio n to th ese su b je c ts* he l e f t two sermons f o r th e f e a s t of A ll Saints* and one each f o r the c e le b r a tio n of Quadragesima, Palm Sunday, E a s te r , and P e n te c o s t. The d ate of G odfrey's r e tu r n to the P a ris abbey from h is r u r a l r e tir e m e n t is unknown. But in 1185 he wrote h is Microcosmus. In the d e d ic a tio n o f t h a t work he men tio n s h is t r i b u l a t i o n s . 7 In the Microcosmus — an a l l e g o r i c a l work — Godfrey t r e a t s of man whom he re p re s e n ts as a s m a ll-s c a le r e p l i c a o f the u n iv e r s e . J u s t as Hugh of S t. V ic to r had considered man in terms of th re e ages which were a l l conceived u ltim - 6. D e lh a y e ,e d ., "Les sermons de Godefroy de S t- V ic to r ," Re- cherches de th ^ o lo g ie ancienne e t m£ditfvale,XXI (1954), 194-247. 7. Delhaye, l e "Microcosmus" de Godefroy de S a i n t - V i c t o r , I - Etude th lo lo g iq u e , I I - Texte £ t a b l i e t p r^ s e n t^ . ( L i l l e , 1951). 136 a t e l y in terms of g r a c e , so a ls o Godfrey d e a ls w ith the th r e e - f o ld h i s t o r y of mankind. He then a p p lie s the th re e sta g e s to the development of the s o u l, as reason lead s i t to consciousness of s in and repentance b rin g s i t unto g ra c e . Man is a microcosm of the u n iv e rse not only m terms of h i s t o r y , b u t a ls o in hi3 a t t r i b u t e s . For the four q u a l i t i e s of the human s p i r i t — s e n s u a l i t y , im agination, reaso n , and i n t e l l i g e n c e — correspond to the fo u r n a tu r a l elem ents. Man's se n su a l f a c u l t i e s resemble th e element e a r th , f o r they a re u n th in k in g and unchanging. Imagination i s akin to w a te r, u n th in k in g y e t m obile. The t h i r d q u a l i t y , reaso n , resem bles a i r in i t s m o b ility and s u b tle n e s s , b u t because reason alone cannot p e n e tr a te the inner core o f t r u t h , i t n o n e th e le ss remains d u ll to a degree. The h ig h e s t q u a l i t y — i n t e l l e c t — is s u b tle l i k e f i r e , very keen and p e n e tr a tin g . The f i r s t book of the Microcosmus d e a ls w ith the f a l l o f man, w ith th e e sta b lish m e n t of the Mosaic law, and f i n a l l y w ith the seven l i b e r a l a r t s as means by which man u n d erstan d s th e u n iv e r s e . W e fin d in t h i s s e c tio n stro n g in d ic a tio n s of R ic h a rd 's te a c h in g as s e t f o r t h in th e L iber exceptionum . In book two, Godfrey d e s c rib e s th e u n iv e r s a l 137 Church aa a microcosm, and d isc u s s e s the v i r t u e s and the v i c e s . Throughout the Microcosmus Godfrey s t r e s s e s the d ig n ity of human n a tu re , and emphasizes th a t bo th the su p e rn a tu ra l and the n a tu r a l worlds a re e s s e n t i a l in the d iv in e plan f o r human p e r f e c tio n and redem ption. I t is in th e Microcosmus t h a t we see most c l e a r l y G odfrey’s debt to Hugh and Richard of S t. V ic to r . From th e b eginning of the work he p r o te s t s a g a in s t the p e s s i mism of those who see in man nothing but weakness and c o rru p tio n . Godfrey r e a l i z e d the importance of th i s world in p re p a rin g the so u l f o r th e n ex t. More poet than s c h o la r, the s u b -p r io r n o n eth eless gave voice to th a t u n i v e r s a l i s t a t t i t u d e towards C h ristia n le a rn in g which made the V ic to r in e abbey famous. 138 IX WALTER OF ST. VICTOR W alter of S t. V ic to r , "the Englishm an," became p r i o r of tne P a r is abbey a t R ic h a rd 's d e a th in 1173. He was to hold t h i s p o s it i o n u n t i l 1203, and d u rin g h is t h i r t y - y e a r a d m in is tr a tio n earned f o r h im se lf, r i g h t l y or wrongly, th e r e p u ta tio n of a rc h h e re sy -h u n te r o f the l a t e tw e lf th cen t u r y . Of h is e a r ly l i f e , a l l t h a t is known is t h a t he was E n g lish . John of Toulouse in the A n tiquitatum r e f e r s to him as " G a lta r iu s , Anglo p r i o r i . " 3- His E n g lish o rig in is a ls o a t t e s t e d to by an e p ita p h quoted by an old m anuscript of th e abbey, from th e beginning of th e t h i r t e e n t h cen tu r y : "Hii su n t p a s to r e s quos nobis Anglia m i s i t ." 2 Serving f i r s t in th e c a p a c ity of s u b - p r io r under Richard and then as p r i o r of the V ic to r in e community under Abbot Guerin, W alter of S t. V ic to r was to become very a c ti v e in the l a t e tw e lf th - c e n tu r y condemnations which stemmed from th e c h r i s t o l o g i c a l c o n tr o v e rs ie s of the day. 1. A n tiq u ita tu m , L ib .V ,c a p .1. 2. US P a ris Mazarine 778, f o .l4 5 v . 139 His f i r s t t a r g e t was the bishop of P o i t i e r s , G ilb e r t of l a P o rr£ e . The views of the bishop however were d i f f i c u l t to pin down, even fo r the most s k i l l f u l th e o lo g ia n , which W alter was n o t. Indeed, some of G i l b e r t 's s t a t e ments re g a rd in g th e second Person of the T r in ity much resembled the opinions expressed by Achard of S t. V ic to r. For a long tim e, in f a c t , Achard*s De d is c r e tio n e anim ae, s p i r i t u s e t m entis was c r e d ite d to th e bishop of P o i t i e r s , so s i m i l a r were t h e i r v ie w s.3 Not only did t h i s ap p ear ance of s i m i l a r i t y add irony to W a lte r's a t t a c k s , but w orse, i t c a s t a s p e rs io n s on the School of S t. V ic to r which W alter, as p r i o r , s u p e rin te n d e d . Before long W alter had extended h is polemics to th e former V ic to r in e s c h o la r P e te r Lombard. By the 1160's th e Lombard had become the le a d in g te a c h e r of P a r is . Ever s in c e he had produced h is books of S en te n c e s, the g re a t s c h o la r had had to defend h i s e x p o s itio n of the H ypostatic Union. T h is, as we have seen, was a very d e l i c a t e sub j e c t . By the m id -tw e lfth c e n tu ry i t had become an ex p lo siv e s u b je c t as w e ll. A fte r th e Lombard's d eath th e s i t u a t i o n became even more a c u te . In 1163 a d ebate over th e c u rre n t c h r i s t o l o - 3. N .M .H & ring,"G ilbert of P o i t i e r s , Author of the De Pi sera. tio n e anim ae. . . , "Mediaeval Studies,X X II (1960),148-191. 140 g ic a l views was conducted a t Tours in the p resence of Pope Alexander I I I . A y ear l a t e r , a t the Council of Sens, th e pope forbade u n d is c ip lin e d d isc u s s io n s of th eo - l o g ic a l iss u e s in Prance. Only a u th o riz e d c o u n c ils could deal w ith them. By 1170 Alexander had condemned a propo s i t i o n on th e n a tu re of C h rist which appeared in P e te r Lombard's works. I t was then t h a t W alter of S t. V ic to r t r i e d so hard to b rin g about a complete posthumous con demnation of the s c h o la r. He was p a r t i a l l y s u c c e s s f u l. At the L ateran Council of 1179, only the p le a s of a number of c a r d in a ls prev en ted a form al condemnation of the S e n te n c e s. In 1187 Pope Alexander d ir e c te d th e m asters of P a ris and Rheims to fo rb id th e te a c h in g of Lombard's q u e stio n a b le p r o p o s itio n . He was not o f f i c i a l l y c le a re d of the s u sp ic io n of heresy u n t i l th e F ourth Lateran Council in 1215. The s o le w r itin g of W alter of S t. V ic to r , a s id e from h is sermons, was a polem ical t r e a t i s e on the c h r i s t o l o g i c a l c o n tro v e rsy , Contra qu atu o r la b y rin th o s F r a n c ia e . 4 in i t he d e a ls not so much w ith the com plicated theo lo g y of the 4. P .G lo r i e u x ,e d ., "Le Contra quatuor la b y rin th o s F ran clae de G au th ier de S t- V ic to r ,'' Archives d 'h i s t o i r e doc- t r i n a l e e t l i t t ^ r a i r e du moyen fiffeTxiX (19521,187-335. 141 H y p o static Union, b u t r a t h e r w ith th e p a r t is a n s of each view. The fo u r " l a b y r i n t h s ” were P e te r A belard, G ilb e rt of la P o rr^e, P e te r of P o i t i e r s , and P e te r Lombard, Wal t e r ’s la c k of genuine competence in d e a lin g w ith m a tte rs of theology was c l e a r l y e v id e n t in t h i s work, and i t proved a r e a l embarrassment to the V ic to rin e community. So a l l - encompassing was h is b lin d a tta c k t h a t he roundly con demned even the f i r s t or orthodox opinion of the H y p o static Union, t h a t view which had been so c l e a r l y expressed in the De Sacram entis o f Hugh of S t. V ic to r . I r o n i c a l l y , th e opinion which W alter regarded as "thoroughly C ath o lic" was t h a t which had r is e n out of the te a c h in g s of G ilb e rt of l a P o rr^ e . I t is p la in th a t W alter was no th e o lo g ia n . And y e t f in d in g h im se lf in the th ic k o f th e th e o lo g ic a l q u a r re ls of h is tim e, he was determ ined to p lay a ro le fo r which he was th o roughly u n s u ite d . I t i s only in h is sermons t h a t we see a d i f f e r e n t sid e of W alter of S t. V ic to r . Some tw enty-one of them a re e x ta n t and have been p o s i t i v e l y i d e n t i f i e d as h i s . W a lte r’s h o m ilies < — e s p e c ia lly those th a t d eal w ith the B lessed V irg in — re v e a l a sweetness of c h a r a c te r and depth of f e e l i n g t h a t a re c u rio u s ly to u c h in g . The f a c t t h a t they issu ed from the pen of th e i r a s c i b l e W alter i s , a t th e very l e a s t , s u r p r i s i n g . 142 But perhaps the most s i g n i f i c a n t a sp e c t of W a lte r's l i f e was h is p o s itio n as p r i o r of th e abbey and head of the School of S t. V ic to r . I t is l i t t l e wonder t h a t God fre y of S t. V ic to r had had to endure so much p e rse c u tio n from Walter* f o r the p r i o r ’s opinion of knowledge was d i r e c t l y contisay to the t r a d i t i o n of th e founders of the sc h o o l. U nlike Hugh and h is successors* W alter deplored the a n c ie n ts . In h is Contra q uatuor la b y r in t h o s > he ta k e s the o p p o rtu n ity to a t t a c k th e pagan a u t h o r i t i e s and the fo u rth book of h is t r e a t i s e was a t i r a d e a g a in s t Socrates* P la to , A r i s t o t l e , and e s p e c i a l l y Seneca, whose e t h i c a l te a c h in g s he saw a t the ro o t o f many contemporary e v i l s . W alter did not recognize the f a c t t h a t f a i t h and reason a re p e r f e c t l y com patible means of knowledge. He regarded philosophy as the arch-enemy of C h r i s t i a n i t y , and deplored the s c h o la s t i c tre n d s which were developing in the d ialectics of the tw e lf th - c e n tu r y th e o lo g ic a l con t r o v e r s i e s . W a lte r 's s u sp ic io n o f th e i n t e l l e c t had a s i g n i f i c a n t impact on th e sc h o o l, f o r i t s outlook was becoming r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t under W a lte r's d i r e c t o r s h i p . The a r t s were t r e a t e d as d i s c i p l i n e s which were c o n tra ry to re v e a le d th e o lo g y , whereas in the p a s t they had been regarded as i t s handmaid. 143 Under W a lte r's guidance, t h e r e f o r e , th e School of S t. V ic to r was b e s e t by two i r r e v e r s i b l e te n d e n c ie s . In th e f i r s t p la c e , i t g r a d u a lly was being em barrassed and d i s c r e d i t e d by the man whose s c h o la rs h ip o s te n s ib ly r e p re sen te d the V ic to rin e i d e a l . Secondly, the t r a d i t i o n a l a t t i t u d e of the school underwent a s i g n i f i c a n t r e v e r s a l . The id e a l of C h ris tia n humanism was being abandoned. More and more the School of S t. V ic to r would be noted not f o r i t s s c h o la rs h ip , but f o r i t s n jy stical theolo g y . 144 X ADAM OP ST. VICTOR Adam of S t. V ic to r was not only the best-known V ic- to r in e p o e t, b u t was one of th e most c e le b ra te d w r ite r s of mediaeval Europe. He is considered along w ith G o ttsch a lk , Thomas of Celano and Jacopone da Todi as one o f the most ab le hymnographers o f th e middle ag es. Adam was the po et c re d ite d w ith u s h e rin g in the t r a n s i t i o n from th e N otkerian sequence to th e s y l l a b i c v erse of the t h i r t e e n t h cen tu ry . The t r a d i t i o n re g a rd in g th e o rig in and l i f e of Adam of S t. V ic to r is a t b e s t sp a rse and u n v e r i f i a b l e . At i t s w orst i t is c o n tr a d ic to r y or a l t o g e t h e r la c k in g in founda t i o n . As might be expected th e ro o ts of the t r a d i t i o n are tra c e a b le to th e P a r is abbey of S t. V ic to r. In the mid*, f o u r te e n th cen tu ry W illiam of St-Ld, d o c to r of theology and abbot of S t. V ic to r (1345-1349), wrote a b r i e f h is t o r y of the abbey, th e E lo g ia quatuor Patrum v ic to rin o ru m , in which he r e f e r r e d to "M ag istri Adam ejusdem S an c ti V ic to r ia P a r i s i e n s i s canonicus p r o fe s s u s , n a tio n e B r ito , . . . " This n o tic e , c i t e d by John o f Toulouse in both th e Annales and th e A n tiq u ita tu m , by P ic a rd , and by Simon Gourdan, con ta in e d a l i s t o f some n in e ty -o n e poems of Adam o f S t. Vic t o r . This m anuscript has a ls o been c ite d by Casimir Oudin '.46 a s c rib e d to "Adamus de W rodronio," "Adamus de Wrodor.i o," and to "Adamus de Rhodonio." This l a s t form w-a t r a n s la te d "Adam of Rennes," r e f e r r i n g to the area in the e a s t of B r itta n y , and h i s t o r i a n s concluded th a t \dam of S t. V ic to r was a B reton. The problem was th a t the au th o r of the L iber se n te n tia ru m was no t our V ic to r in e , but a Pre- m o n stra te n sia n from England, Adam of Wodheam. On th e s tr e n g th of t h i s f a l s e a t t r i b u t i o n , however, L^on G au tier concluded t h a t Adam of S t. V ic to r came from B r i t t a n y . 5 On the o th e r hand, B r i a l , weighing the e v i dence, had thought i t w ise r to re se rv e judgment on the m a t t t r of Adam’s o rig in ,® w hile Dreves t r i e d to e s t a b l i s h th a t the V ic to rin e poet had come from E n g lan d .7 I f the t r a d i t i o n of Adam’s o r ig in is confused, so is the information on h is death d a te . The a u th o rs of G a llia C h ris tia n a t e l l us t h a t Adam died sometime during the a b b a t i a l term of Guerin, t h a t i s , between 1173 and 1194. 5. G a u tie r, l a l l t t ^ r a t u r e c a th o liq u e e t n a tio n a ls ( L i l l e , 1 8 9 4 ),p p .197-219. 6. B r i a l , H i s to i re l i t t e r a i r e de la France,XV (P a ris,1 8 2 C ). 7. Dreves, Stimmen aus Maria Laach.XXIX (1885), 278-306; 416-441. 145 in h is Commsntarius (L eip zig , 1722). Leopold D e lis le was one of the f i r s t to c a s t doubts on t h i s work a t t r i b u t e d to W illiam of St-LS. He i n s i s t e d th a t the l i s t of Adam's works and the re fe re n c e to h is p lace of b i r t h ("n a tio n e B rito " ) a c t u a l l y o r ig in a te d a t th e end o f th e f i f t e e n t h c e n tu r y .1 The E lo g ia was c ite d a ls o by Haureau.^ However the m anuscript in q u e stio n seems to have been l o s t . This lo s s has been noted by J . C h S tillo n , who doubts th a t the William of St-L& manu s c r i p t ev er e x is te d .^ On th e face of i t th e n o tic e of William of St-Ld would seem c l e a r l y enough to in d ic a te Adamfs o r ig i n . Most o f th e e a r l i e r a u th o rs w r itin g about Adam were con t e n t to s t a t e t h a t he was a "B reton." However th e "n atione B rito " re fe re n c e has led to much confusion. Was Adam an Englishman, or was he French? In 1739 Montfaucon found a m anuscript of a work e n t i t l e d L iber sen te n tia ru m magis- t r i Adae de Rodronio4 which th e c o p y ists had v a r io u s ly 1. Delisle, Bibliothfeque de l'& o le des C h a rtre s ,XX( 1859), 197. 2. Haur^au, Lea oeuvres de Hugues de S a in t-V ic to r ( P a ris , 1886), p . 48. 3. C h S tillo n , "Le contenu, l 1a u t h e n t i c i t y e t la d ate du L iber exceptionum . . . " RMAL»IV (1948), 365-366. 4. Montfaucon, Bisbliotheca b ib lio th e c a ru m m anuscriptorum nova ( P a r i s , " 1739)^11,1259. 146 a s c rib e d to "Adamus de W rodronio," "Adamus de Wrodonio," and to "Adamus de Rhodonio." This l a s t form was t r a n s la te d "Adam of Rennes," r e f e r r i n g to the a re a in the e a s t of B r itta n y , and h i s t o r i a n s concluded th a t Adam of S t. V ic to r was a B reton. The problem was th a t th e au th o r of the L iber se n te n tia ru m was not our V ic to r in e , bu t a Pre- m o n stra te n sia n from England, Adam of Wodheam. On th e s tr e n g th of t h i s f a ls e a t t r i b u t i o n , however, L^on G au tier concluded t h a t Adam of S t. V ic to r came from B r i t t a n y . 5 On th e o th e r hand, B r i a l , weighing the e v i dence, had thought i t w iser to re se rv e judgment on the m a tte r of Adam's o r i g i n , 5 w hile Dreves t r i e d to e s t a b l i s h th a t the V ic to rin e poet had come from E n g lan d .7 I f the t r a d i t i o n of Adam's o r ig in is confused, so is the information on h is death d a te . The a u th o rs of G a llia C h ris tia n a t e l l us t h a t Adam died sometime d u rin g the a b b a t i a l term of Guerin, t h a t i s , between 1173 and 1194. 5. G a u tie r, l a l i t e r a t u r e c a th o lio u e e t n a tio n a le ( L i l l e , 1 8 9 4 ),p p . 197-219. 6. B r i a l , H is to lr e l i t t £ r a i r e de la F ra n c e ,XV ( P a r i s , 1820). 7. Dreves, Stimmen aus Maria Laach.XXIX (1885), 278-306; 416-441. 147 DuCange placed h is d e a th in 1 1 7 7 ,^ w hile F ^ lib ie n and Lobineau decided on 1192 as a more p la u s i b l e d a t e . 9 B r ia l h im se lf tends to fav o r t h i s l a t e r date f o r Adam*3 d e a th . Tflien M ollat remarked th a t h i s t o r i a n s a c t u a l l y know n othing fo r c e r t a i n on the date of Adam*3 b i r t h , nor of h is country, nor of h is l i f e or d eath , he s c a rc e ly was e x ag g e ra tin g . Indeed he s t a t e s w ith o u t q u a l i f i c a t i o n th a t Adam was n e ith e r from B r itta n y nor from E nglan d ,10 and t h a t he d ied in 1177 according to some a u th o rs , or in 1192 acco rd in g to o th e r s . About a l l we do know was t h a t Adam e n te re d the P a ris abbey of St. V ic to r around m id -tw e lfth c e n tu ry , th a t he was a poet of some renown, and t h a t even du rin g h is own l i f e t i m e he was to b rin g fame to the abbey as h is v e rse s spread beyond i t s w a lls . In h is L iber exceptionum, w r i tt e n probably b e fo re 1160, Richard of S t. V ic to r c i t e s a t le n g th s e v e r a l poems, a t t r i b u t i n g them to "eg reg iu s v e r s i f i c a t o r . " Since i t was 8. DuCange, Index auctorum in Glossarium mediae e t infim ae l a t i n i t a t i s (ed. by G.A.Henschel, P a r is , 1850J7 9. F e lib ie n e t Lobineau, H is to ir e de l a v i l l e de P a r is (ftu> i s , 1707),V ,197. 10. M o llat, "Adam de S t-V ic to r ," D ic tio n n a ire d fh i s t o i r e e t de geographic e c c l^ s ia s tiq u e ( P a r i s , 1 9 1 2 ) ,I. 148 n o t customary to r e f e r to l i v i n g a u th o rs by name, t h i s c i t a t i o n would confirm the t h e s i s th a t Richard and Adam were contem poraries a t the abbey, and t h a t Richard e n t e r ta in e d a c e r t a i n ad m ira tio n f o r th e a b i l i t i e s of the p o e t. Indeed, Ch&tillon goes so f a r as to a s s e r t t h a t Adam probably en tered the m onastery du rin g the regime of G il- d u in , th a t i s , b efo re 1155, and t h a t Adam, li k e R ichard, would have been a p u p il of Hugh (who died in 1 1 4 1 ),H Apparently R ic h a rd 's a d m ira tio n fo r the p o e t 's s k i l l was shared by Godfrey o f S t. V ic to r , fo r the l a t t e r re p ro duced p a r t of Adam's Superne m a tris gaudia in h is Micro- cosmus, w r itte n ca.1185. Godfrey, lik e R ichard, does not r e f e r to the poet by name, a f a c t which lends stro n g sup p o r t to the argument f o r the l a t e r date o f Adam's d eath , 1192. Biographers are unanimous in a t t r i b u t i n g a g r e a t num b e r of w ritin g s to Adam. W e fin d in the m anuscript a s c rib e d to W illiam of St-Ld, along w ith th e n in ety -o n e poems given to Adam, two o th e r works* th e E x p o sitio prologorum b e a t i Hieronymi and the Summa de v o ca b u lls Bibliorum — In quo etiam l i b r o /E x p o s itio prologorum7 f a c i t m u lto tie s mentionem de quodam l i b r o quern ip se composuit qui v o c a tu r Summa de v o cab u lis Bib- 11. Ch& tillon, "De Guillaume de Champeaux & Thomas G a llu s," RMAL,VIII (1952),247, 149 liorum seu e t communis Summa B r i t o n i s , e t de a l i i s operibus v i r t u o s i s . 12 E v id e n tly W illiam of St-Ld f e l t he had to j u s t i f y the a t t r i b u t i o n of the Summa B r i t o n i s . To do t h i s he drew on re fe re n c e s found in the E x p o sitio prologorum . This would pu t him on s a f e r ground, fo r he had a lre a d y a s c rib e d the l a t t e r work to Adam. The Summa B r i t o n i s , a b i b l i c a l v o c a b u la ry , had f i r s t been a t t r i b u t e d to Adam of S t. V ic to r in a t h i r t e e n t h - c e n tu ry m anuscript* " E x p lic it summa m a g is tr i Ade B rito n is c an o n ici S ancti V ic to r is de V c a b u l i s B ib lie .* 1 3 This a t t r i b u t i o n was re p e a te d in the f i f t e e n t h cen tu ry by a n o th e r m an u scrip t. However, u n le ss h i s t o r i a n s have e r re d g ra v e ly in the m a tte r of Adam's d e a th , th e Summa B r i t o n i s could not be h i s , f o r i t mentions by name people who were l i v i n g in the t h i r t e e n t h c e n tu ry : Uguccione of P isa (d .1 2 1 0 ), Alexander Neckham (d .1 2 1 7 ), and Alexander of V i l l e d i e u (d .1 2 4 0 ). N onetheless th e a t t r i b u t i o n of the Summa to Adam of S t. V ic to r is not hard to u n d erstan d , f o r t r a d i t i o n had long seemed determ ined to make a Breton of him. The i n c o r r e c t 12. M S P a r is , Bibliothftque N a tio n a le , L a tin 14970. 13. M S P a r is , Bibliothfcque N a tio n a ls , L a tin 14795. 14. M S P a r is , Biblioth&que N a tio n a le , L a tin 14504. 150 a t t r i b u t i o n o f the commentary on the S entences, a s c rib e d by c o p y ists to "Adamus de Rhodonio," thought to be Adam of S t. V ic to r , was the source of much of the confu sio n . Thus when com pilers encountered the name of "Adam the Breton" on the Summa they concluded not u n n a tu ra lly th a t t h i s was the famous Adam of S t. V ic to r , the Breton from Rennes. I f the Summa B rito n is was a s c rib e d to th e V ic to rin e p o e t, i t was only n a tu r a l t h a t th e E x p o sitio prologorum Hieronymi would a lso be given to him, f o r i t r e f e r s o fte n to th e Summa. In the E x p o sitio however the name "Adam" is not included in tbe t i t l e s " I n c ip iu n t exposiciones p r o logorum B ib lie a B rito n e p o st ex p o sicio n es vocabularum B ib lie p e r ipsum c o m p ila te ."15 These a t t r i b u t i o n s have been given credence n e a rly to our own day, la r g e l y through the work of L^on G au tier in th e m id -n in e te e n th c e n tu ry . B r i a l , w r itin g some t h i r t y y ears b e f o re , had s e r io u s ly q u estio n e d th e v a l i d i t y of c r e d i t in g Adam of S t. V ic to r w ith anything o th e r than po e t r y . He was q u ite s k e p ti c a l of a t t r i b u t i n g to him an ex p o s itio n of th e C a n tic le of C a n tic le s which bore the t i t l e M a g istri Adam e x p o s itio in c a n tic a canticorum . Another 15. M S P a r i s , Bibliothfcque N a tio n a le , L a tin 14504, f o .llO b . 151 commentary, t h i s one on the K p is tle to the Hebrews — Adam Anglicus super ep isto lam ad Hebraeos — belonged not to th e V ic to r in e , B r ia l th ought, but r a t h e r to the Premon- s t r a t e n s i a n Adam of V'odheam.16 In h is d e f i n i t i v e e d itio n of Adam’s poems, G autier a s c rib e s to th e V ic to rin e about h a l f a dozen o th e r works as w e ll. One of th ese was the Soliloquium de i n s t r u c t i o n s anim ae, a t r a c t which had been e x p re ssly a t t r i b u t e d to th e V ic to rin e by one m anuscripts w Prologus in solilo q u iu m mag i s t r i Ade d o c to r is e g r e g ii de Sancto V ic to re de i n s t r u c t tio n e a n im e ."!? I n te r e s t i n g l y enough, G au tier does not seem to have known o f t h i s P a r is m an u sc rip t, f o r he c i t e s only two o th e rs — B ru sse ls Bibliothfeque r o y a le 1229 and 1929 — which d i f f e r markedly from the P a ris documents Domnis s u is e t am icis in C h r is ti v is c e rib u s d i l e c t i s , v ir o i l l u s t r i domino G a lte rio p r i o r i e t u n iv e r s is f r a t r i b u s in e c c l e s i a s a n c ti An- drae in S c o tia C h r is ti s e r v i t i o m a n c ip a tis, f r a t e r Adam, Dei e t servorum Dei servus in u t- i l i s e t in d ig n u s. These same m anuscripts had led B r ia l in 1820 to a t t r i b u t e th e Soliloquium to Adam Scot, G au tier seems to have been in flu en c ed by M, S, If. D eutsch, who c r e d ite d Adam not only w ith th e Summa and th e 16. B r i a l , H is to ir e l i t t £ r a i r e de la F ran ce,XV (1820) 17. M S P a r is , Biblioth& que N a tio n a le , L a tin 2921, fo .7 0 . 152 E x p o s itio , but a ls o w ith a t r e a t i s e e n t i t l e d De d is c r e tio n e anim ae, spiritus e t m entis .18 This l a t t e r of course is now recognized as being the work of Abbot Achard of S t. Vic t o r . 1® G au tier was duly c r i t i c i z e d and c o rre c te d by Haur^au, who s te a d f a s t l y m aintained th a t Adam of S t. V ic to r had l e f t us only l i t u r g i c a l p o e try . Anything e ls e Haureau co n sid ered to be f a l s e l y a t t r i b u t e d . 20 He s e t t l e d the issu e by a s c r ib in g the Summa B rito n is and the E x p o sitio prologorum to William the Breton. As f o r Adam's p o etry i t s e l f , the f i r s t c o lle c tio n of h is sequences — t h i r t y - s i x of them in a l l — was pu b lish ed by the humanist Josse C lichtove in 1517. These sequences, to g e th e r w ith commentaries, were re p u b lish e d in 1880 by Migne.21 M. L. Guillaume expanded the l i s t , p r e s e n tin g a t r a n s l a t i o n of t h i r t y - f o u r of the poems of Adam in h is C o lle c tio n de c la s s iq u e s l a t i n s compares. In the l a s t e d i t i o n of L^on G a u tie r ’s work, a p p earin g in 1894, f o r t y - f iv e poems are p o s i t i v e l y a s c rib e d to Adam, and s ix remain 18. M.S‘ *M.Deutsch, "Adam de S t- V ic to r ," Realencyclopadie filr p r o te s t a n t i s c h e Theologie ( L e ip z ig ,1854),1,163-164. 19. Morin, "Un t r a i t s faussem ent a t t r i b u £ ti Adam de S a in t- V ic to r ," Revue b ^ n ^ d i c t i n e .XVI (1899),218-219. 20. Haureau, N otices e t e x t r a i t s de quelques m anuscrits l a t i n s de la B ibliothS que N atio n ale (P a r i s , 1878},V. 21. PL,CXCVI,1428-1534. 153 in the "probable" c a te g o ry . G autier a ls o included a long l i s t of th e f a l s e or d o u b tfu l a t t r i b u t i o n s . One of the b e s t e d itio n s of Adam’s p o etry is t h a t of M isset and A u b r y . 2 2 G a u tie r, u sin g fo u rte e n th -c e n tu ry l i s t s , had o r i g i n a l l y a s c rib e d to Adam one hundred poems, which appeared in h is e a rly e d itio n s of Adam's works. I t was M isset who c o rre c te d t h i s . 23 M isset had devised a method of i n t e r n a l c r i t i c i s m which he used to e s t a b l i s h th e te x ts of Adam’s poems. Gaston P a ris s e t f o r t h the b a s ic p r i n c ip l e s of t h i s method and addressed h im se lf sp ec i f i c a l l y to G a u tie r, who s i g n i f i c a n t l y m odified h is conclu sio n s in h is t h i r d e d itio n of Adam's p o etry p u b lish ed in 1 8 9 4 . 2 4 Aided by t h i s new c r i t i c a l method, M isset is thought to have e s ta b lis h e d s o li d l y the a u t h e n t i c i t y of f o r t y - f i v e of Adam's poems. B e n e fittin g from the re s e a rc h 22. M isset e t Aubry, Melanges de m usicologie c r i t i q u e . Les p ro ses d'Adam de S t-V ic to r , te x te e t musique pr^'cVd^es d ’une £tude c r i t i q u e ( P a r i s , 1900). 23. M isse t, "Po^sie rythmique au moyen Stge: B ssai p h ilo - logique e t l i t t ^ r a i r e su r le s oeuvres p o ^ tiq u es d'Adam de S a i n t - V i c t o r , " L e ttr e s c h r ^ tie n n e s t Revue d'enselgne- m ent, de p h i l o l o g i e , e t de"~c r i t i q u e T l8 f e l) . 24. Gaston P a r is , " L e ttre a M. Leon G au tier su r la v e r s i f i c a tio n l a t i n e rythm ique," Bibliothfeque de 1 *6 c o l e des Chartres,XXVII (1866),578-610. 154 of M isse t, Blume and B a n n iste r p u b lish ed in 1915 the l a t e s t e d i t i o n of Adam’s w o r k s , 25 Adam of S t. V ic to r was i f not the in n o v a to r, a t l e a s t th e most renowned r e p r e s e n ta tiv e o f a new mode of s tr u c t u r e and rhythm in l i t u r g i c a l p o e try . D eparting from the very rhythmic sequences of N otker, Adam d iv id ed h is po etry in to s tr o p h e s , each stro p h e made up of an equal number of verses. In a d d itio n each stro p h e f a l l s in to sym m etrical h a l f - s tr o p h e s , The m e tric scheme was based on the number of s y l l a b l e s in each l i n e . Most of Adam’s sequences follow a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c th re e- p a r t p a t t e r n . The poem opens w ith a s a l u t a t i o n , a s t a t e l y paean of jo y . This is follov^ed by the development o f the theme w ith a th e o lo g ic a l e x p o s itio n . F in a lly th e poet r e tu rn s to the j u b i l a n t sentim ents of the p re lu d e , c lo sin g h is sequence w ith a p ra y e r. The p r in c ip a l i n s p i r a t i o n f o r Adam’s p o e try was Holy S c r ip tu r e , i n t e r p r e t e d u s u a lly from a m essian ic v iew point. The Zyma v e tu s e x p u rg e tu r, an E a s te r hymn, and the Lux iocunde f o r P e n teco st are good examples. The In n a ta le 25. Blume & B a n n is te r, L itu rg is c h e Prosen des U b erg an g stiles und d er aw eiten Epoche, inbesondere d ie dem Adam von S an k t-V ic to r augeschrieben (Leipzig,1915TI 155 S a lv a to r is and the Laude Sion r e f l e c t not only Holy W rit, bu t the outgrowth of p o s itiv e th eology. Adam's v e rse s abound in the C h ris tia n symbolism th a t in c re a s in g ly p e r vaded the more m y stic a l V ic to rin e l i t e r a t u r e . His c e le b r a te d Salve m ater S a l v a t o r i s , w r itte n fo r the N a tiv ity , is a v e r i t a b l e l i t a n y of f ig u r e s of the V irg in . Adam a lso made use of the S c rip tu re s employed s p e c i f i c a l l y in tne sacred l i t u r g y , and drew d i r e c t l y from i n t r o i t s , c o l l e c t s , and o th e r p o rtio n s of p a r t i c u l a r Masses. His E a s te r poem Salve d i e s , fo r in s ta n c e , r e c a l l s the I n t r o i t of the N a tiv ity Octave, "dum te n e re n t cuncta sile n tu m ," as w ell as i t s so u rc e , Proverbs 18:14. A second source of i n s p i r a t i o n f o r the g r e a t V ic to rin e poet was th e legends of the s a i n t s , as fo r example h is poem on S t. Denys. Even better-know n was h is j u b i l a n t hymn f o r the ab b ey 's p a tro n , S t. V ic to r, c e le b r a tin g th e t r a n s l a t i o n o f the s o l d i e r - m a r t y r 's r e l i c s from M a rs e ille s to the P a ris abbey. The l i t u r g i c a l value of Adam's poems is u n d en ia b le . W e fin d them to be r i c h mines of b i b l i c a l , a l l e g o r i c a l , and m y stic a l e x p re ss io n . Adam too was possessed of th a t c a r e f u l b alan ce of m a g iste r and m ystic which c h a r a c te r iz e d the V ic to rin e sch o o l. But whereas h is companion Richard combined th e se q u a l i t i e s to produce t r e a t i s e s and h o m ilie s, 156 Adam expressed h im se lf in psalmody. Aside from t h e i r l i t u r g i c a l s ig n i f i c a n c e , Adam's se quences marked an im portant stag e in p o e tic development. His e le g a n t s y lla b ic v e r s e s , p o lish e d and c l e a r , e f fe c te d a m e tric a l re v o lu tio n in r e l ig i o u s p o e try , and provided i n s p i r a t i o n f o r l a t e r p o e ts. Indeed Thomas Aquinas, e d i f ie d by Adam'8 Laudes cru cia a t t o l l a m u s , was prompted to compose h is famous o f f ic e f o r the f e a s t of Corpus C h r i s t i . Adam’s v e rse s b re a th e d an a i r of p ie ty th a t was a t once mature and c h i l d l i k e . T e ch n ically fla w le s s , th ey y e t r e ta in e d t h a t q u a lity of fre sh n e ss which is the mark of p o e tic g e n iu s. But though Adam's p o etry won much acclaim fo r i t s a u th o r and f o r S t. V ic to r , the canon h im se lf remains ob s c u re , s h ie ld e d by th e mantle of s il e n c e . Our one glim pse of Adam of S t. V ic to r — and perhaps most c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the man h im se lf -— is the l i t t l e poem on human m isery which served as h is e p ita p h : Haeres p e c c a t i , n a tu ra f i l i u s i r a e , E x iliiq u e reus n a s c i tu r omnis homo. Unde s u p e rb it homo, cujus conceptio c u lp a, Nasci poena, la b o r v i t a , necease mori? Vana sa lu s hom inis, vanus decor, omnia vana; I n te r vana n i h i l vanius e a t hominae. Dum magis a l l u d i t p r a e s e n tis g l o r i a v i t a e , P r a e t e r i t , imo f u g i t ; non f u g i t , imo p e r i t . Post hominem verm is, p o st vermem f i t c i n i s , heu, heui Sic r e d i t ad cinerem g l o r i a n o s tr a sim ul. Hie ego qui jaceo m iser e t m i s e r a b i l i s Adam, Unam pro aurmno munere posco precem: P eccav i, f a t e o r , veniam p e t o t parce f a t e n t i , Parce p a t e r , f r a t r e s p a r c i t e , parce Deus. 158 XI POETS, PREACHERS, AND PENANCE During th e second h a l f of th e tw e lfth century the School of S t. V ic to r experienced a s u b tle change. The s h i f t in emphasis is c l e a r l y r e f l e c t e d in the l i t e r a r y output of the' canons. B i b l i c a l and dogmatic t r e a t i s e s are few er. S e lf-e x p re s s io n assumed new forms: p o e try , hom ily, and p e n i t e n t i a l d e v o tio n s. The most c e le b ra te d of the V ic to rin e poets of course was Adam, whose r e l ig i o u s i n s i g h t s were matched only by h is h ig h ly p o lish e d s t y l e . Although Adam remained ob s c u re , h is sequences broke the bonds of c l a u s t r a l s ile n c e to gain c o n sid e ra b le renown f o r t h e i r au th o r and h is abbey. Godfrey of S t. V ic to r was a ls o an accomplished p o e t. His Preconium A ugustini is a p ith y statem en t of dogmatic theology so s k i l l f u l l y rendered in verse as t o lo se none of i t s p r e c is io n and c l a r i t y . Another of G odfrey’s poems, a c a n t i c l e a d d ressed to Mary, b e tra y s h is sweet and simple d evotion to th e Blessed V irg in . Tfhen Godfrey wrote h is Pons philoBophiae he was to follow the le a d of Adam of S t. V ic to r, whose s k i l l he had much adm ired. In book one we f in d v erses whose meter de 159 pends on s y ll a b l e s r a t h e r than s tr e s s e d a c c e n ts . This lengthy poem* in which Godfrey d e sc rib e s the s t a t e of le a rn in g in th e l a t e tw e lf th cen tu ry , was composed in a new g enre, b e a rin g an unm istakable resemblance to the new v e rn a c u la r p o e try th a t was ap pearing throughout C h riste n dom. Bishop Arnoul o f L isie u x who liv e d in re tire m e n t a t th e P a ris abbey was h im se lf a v e r s i f i e r . His li n e s to o must be included in the growing V ic to rin e anthology, Leonius of S t. V ic to r a lso wrote p o e try . Although h is poems have not shared the im m o rtality of Adam’s sequences, h i s name was given to the "Leonine h ex am eter."! His r e p u ta tio n was made perhaps by two works, composed in a tone of candid f a m i l i a r i t y , addressed by the humble canon to h is c o m p a trio t, Pope Adrian TV, and to A d rian 's s u c c e sso r, Alexander I I I . Abbot Guerin* in an e f f o r t perhaps to channel th e can o n 's t a l e n t s in th e i n t e r e s t of p r o p r i e t y , commissioned Leonius to compose th e e n t i r e B ib le h i s t o r y in v e r s e . This the poet proceeded to do, and when he had completed h is momentous ta s k , Leonius d ed ic a te d the m a ste r p ie c e to the abbot of S t. V ic to r. P o rtio n s of i t are ex t a n t . 1. Bonnard, H is to ir e de l'a b b a y e ro y a le de S a in t- V ic to r , 1,136. 160 A much s tro n g e r l i t e r a r y movement which was ta k in g p la c e in the School of S t. V ic to r, however, was th e in c re a sin g tre n d towards hom ily. Around m id-century th e s u b - p r io r of the abbey, G arnier of S t. V ic to r , composed h i s Gregorianum. This remarkable work, a p r o je c t to which G arnier d ed ic a te d h is e n t i r e l i f e a t the abbey, was a hugh six teen -b o o k concordance of Holy S c r ip tu r e . I t was based on h is p a in s ta k in g c o l l e c t i o n and m astery of th e e n t i r e corpus of S t. Gregory the G reat. Two e d itio n s a re extant.® G a r n ie r's work was in ten d ed as a guide f o r th e fo rm u latio n and c o n s tru c tio n of sermons. I t a p p a re n t ly proved q u ite u s e f u l to th e canons, fo r John o f Toulouse is q u ite p r a i s e f u l of i t , and Simon Gourdan a t t e s t s em p h atically to i t s currency long a f t e r G a r n ie r's d e a th . The second h a l f of the tw e lf th cen tu ry was to y i e l d a number of c o lle c tio n s of sermons. The g e n e ra l tre n d in the l i t e r a r y l i f e of the abbey seems to have been le s s toward major t r e a t i s e s and more in the d i r e c t io n of th e se sm a lle r p ie c e s . Perhaps the l a s t V ic to r in e to produce an im pressive corpus of b o th was R ichard. Richard of S t. V ic to r p lie d h is l i t e r a r y s k i l l to 2 . P ie r r e Gandoul, e d ., G u ern erii siv e G a rn e rii enucleamen- t a B i b l i a e , com pilata ex G reg o rii codicibus ( P a r i s , 1518). Burchard Knick, e d ., Gregorlanum ( P a r i s ,1608). 161 c o n s tru c t a c o n sid e ra b le number of s h o rt h o m ilie s. His Sermones centum are co n c ise , c e r t a i n l y e d ify in g , and q u ite i n s t r u c t i v e . The Old Testament provides h is f a v o r ite themes, most of which are in s p ir e d by the Psalms. Dwell ing on the more joyous c a n t i c l e s of p r a i s e , Richard ex p la in s h is t e x t s a t t h e i r v a rio u s le v e ls of meaning w ith rem arkable c l a r i t y and b r e v i ty . His marvelous e x p lic a tio n s appeal not only to the i n t e l l e c t but to the m ystic a s p i r a tio n s of the s o u l. His r h e t o r i c is su c c in c t and e f f e c t i v e . Often he re p e a ts a phrase f o r em phasis. The re a d e r alm ost h ears the voice of th e g r e a t V ic to rin e speaking h is w r itte n w ords. Another f o r c e f u l p reach er was Achard of Tit. V ic to r. Among the f i f t e e n e x ta n t sermons p o s it i v e l y i d e n t i f i e d as h is we f in d two fo r Advent, f iv e fo r th e season of the Fasch, s e v e ra l composed f o r th e d e d ic a tio n o f a church, and one in honor of S t. A ugustine. I t should not s u r p r is e us to fin d t h a t A chard's h o m ilies echo th e themes of h is la r g e r w r itin g s — th e De T r i n i t a t e and the De d is c r e tio n e animae, s p i r i t u s e t m e n tis . That th e c h r i s t o l o g i c a l con t r o v e r s i e s rag in g a t the time were uppermost in h is mind is q u ite e v id e n t from the co n ten t of h is messages. In s e v e ra l o f h is sermons we f in d s im p lif ie d ex p la n a tio n s of the n a tu re and Person of the S av io u r. The o v e r a ll aim of 162 A chard's hom ilies seems to have been the p r e s e n ta tio n of the s p i r i t u a l h i s t o r y of mankind: man's c re a tio n ad sim- ilitu d in e m D ei, h is f a l l and i t s consequences, and the s a l v i f i c s ig n if ic a n c e of th e In c a rn a tio n of the New Adam to which the H ypostatic Union is a c r u c ia l m a tte r indeed. A t h i r d c o l l e c t i o n of e x ta n t sermons was w r itte n by the little -k n o w n canon Maurice o f F t. V ic to r. W e possess only a h a lf-d o z e n of h is h o m ilie s, bu t th e su b je c t m a tte r of these few is most i n t e r e s t i n g . Maurice emphasized holy s u f f e r in g as a means of grace to achieve p erso n al s a n c t i t y . Three of h is sermons c e le b r a te th e p atro n of the abbey, th e m artyr S t. V ic to r . Another is d ed icated to the ab b ey 's s p i r i t u a l fou n d er, S t. A ugustine. Godfrey of S t. V ic to r too was a p re a c h e r. He in c o r p o ra te d an im portant s e r i e s of sermons in h is Microcosmus. But numerous o th e rs have been convincingly i d e n t i f i e d as h i s . I t is perhaps c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f Godfrey’ s outlook t h a t he chose to emphasize th e In c a rn a tio n r a t h e r than th e P assion of C h r is t. Prom th e q u a n tity of h is sermons we can probably assume t h a t th e s u b -p r io r had achieved a c e r t a i n renown f o r h is h o m ile tic a l s k i l l . At th e end of th e tw e lf th century the th re e p r i n c i p a l d i r e c t o r s of the community — s u b - p r io r , p r i o r , and abbot 163 — were noted p re a c h e rs . The s u b -p rio r was Godfrey. P r io r W a lte r 's sermons show him in the b e a t p o s sib le l i g h t , and a f f o r d a more balanced view of t h a t o s te n s ib ly cantankerous canon. His twenty-one e x ta n t hom ilies re v e a l in s ig h ts of r e a l p ro fu n d ity . Two of h is f a v o r i t e themes a re the B lessed V irg in — we fin d sermons on her n a t i v i t y , p u r i f i c a t i o n , and assum ption — and the Epiphany. Besides th e se s u b je c ts W aiter wrote s e v e ra l sermc s to c e le b r a te th e Advent, th e Pasch, and the f e a s t of A ll S a in ts . Abbot Absalon of S t. V ic to r, w r itin g a t the c lo se of th e c e n tu ry , has l e f t us no l e s s than f i f t y sermons. A g r e a t number o f th ese were w r i tt e n fo r the season of Ad v e n t. As f o r the pasch al c e le b r a tio n s , Absalon l e f t fo u r sermons f o r Quadragesima, th re e on the P assio n , and one on th e R e s u rre c tio n fo r the E a s te r f e a s t . Three of h is hom i l i e s d eal w ith the Ascension, and fo u r were w r itte n fo r P e n te c o s t. Many of A bsalon's sermons a re devoted to the V irg in : fo u r on the p u r i f i c a t i o n , th re e on the an nuncia t i o n , fo u r f o r the f e a s t of the assum ption, and one d e a l ing w ith her n a t i v i t y . A bsalon's w ritin g s in d ic a te t h a t th e abbot was indeed an accom plished s t y l i s t . His sermons a r e not only numerous b u t are noted f o r t h e i r r ic h doc t r i n a l c o n te n t. 164 By the end of the tw e lf th century the l i t e r a r y o u t p u t of th e abbey of S t. V ic to r had undergone a s u b tle but s i g n i f i c a n t change. I t was decid ed ly meagre compared w ith the f i r s t h a lf - c e n tu r y of th e community’s e x iste n c e .' But more im p o rtan t, the c h a r a c te r of the works produced a lso changed. These l a t e r w ritin g s c l e a r l y in d ic a te an a l t e r a tio n in the outlook of the abbey and i t s school. The m y s tic a l, s u b je c tiv e s t r a i n s in the w ritin g s of Hugh and Richard were s tu d ie d , im ita te d , and held a l o f t as th e t r u e s t examples of the V ic to rin e i n t e l l e c t u a l t r a d i t i o n . But w hile th ese g r e a t s c h o la rs had indeed c u l t i v ated a r i c h i n t e r i o r l i f e , they a lso had emphasized the im portance of a good u n d erstan d in g of the tem poral world as bein g e s s e n t i a l fo r a f u l l commitment to the E te r n a l. When in the f i r s t decades of the t h i r t e e n t h century a b r i e f l i t e r a r y f l o u r i s h did take p la c e a t the abbey, i t s c h a r a c te r was d ecid ed ly xqystic. The p ro g e n ito r o f t h i s new m ystic l i t e r a t u r e was Thomas G a llu s. With h is death in 1241 th e s t a r of S t. V ic to r had d isap p e ared below the i n t e l l e c t u a l h o riz o n . Thomas G a llu s, the l a s t well-known V ic to rin e w r i t e r , concerned h im se lf w ith a l l e g o r i c a l e x e g e s is . His most famous commentary d e a l t w ith th e C a n tic le of C a n tic le s . 165 Thomas' f a s c in a tio n w ith Pseudo-Dionysius led him to w rite se v e ra l works based on the theme of the C e l e s t i a l H ie ra r chy: the Theologia m y stic a , the De nominibus d i v i n i s , the In H ierarchiam c o e le ste m , and the Super H lerarchiam e c c le s - i a s t e n . He a ls o wrote se v e ra l commentaries on the Pseudo- Dionysian l e t t e r s . In a d d itio n to these works, he p ro duced a t r e a t i s e on contem plation, De septem gradibus con- te m p la tio n i3 . This l i t e r a r y corpus of Thomas C allus came to ty p if y the tendency of the l a t e V ic to rin e school towards s p e c u la tiv e m ysticism . U n fo rtu n a te ly , t h a t re p u ta tio n has been extended to the e n t i r e t r a d i t i o n of the School of S t. V ic to r , and i t s tr u e importance in th e i n t e l l e c t u a l f e r ment of the t w e lf th and t h i r t e e n t h century has been o v er looked or fo rg o tte n . I f the canons no longer were noted f o r t h e i r academic p u r s u i t s , they did achieve c o n sid e rab le renown as co n fes s o r s . Two b re th re n in p a r t i c u l a r — Robert of Plamesbury and P e te r of P o i t i e r s (not the c h a n c e llo r of the U n iv e rsity of P a r is ) — were e s p e c ia lly noted f o r t h e i r p e n i t e n t i a l s k i l l . Soth of th e se V ic to rin e s produced works designed to a id o th e r c o n fe sso rs in the d isch a rg e of t h e i r d u t i e s . R o b e rt's L iber .. p e n it e n t i a l i s shows c o n sid e ra b le th e o lo g ic a l i n s i g h t , as w e ll as a w ealth of p r a c t i c a l ex p e rie n c e . P e t e r 's t r e a t i s e of th e same t i t l e , w r itte n in e le g a n t 166 s t y l e , was regarded as one of the b e s t p e n i t e n t i a l guides of i t s day. The l i t e r a r y s k i l l of th ese l a t e tw e lfth -c e n tu ry V ic to rin e s — th ese p o e ts , p reach ers and p e n ite n c ie r s — is beyond d is p u te . An Adam of S t. V ic to r or a Thomas Gallus would g r e a t l y enhance the abbey’s r e p u ta tio n , f o r t h e i r w r itin g s e x h ib ite d a g r e a t deal of m e rit. What is c l e a r , however, is th a t a t the School of S t. V ic to r the A r i s t o t e l i a n or Hugonian t h e o r e t i c s and p r a c tic a had come to s ig n if y s p e c u la tiv e m ysticism and p e n ite n c e . 167 X II CONCLUSION In the l a t e t w e lf th century the School of S t. V ic to r underwent a marked change in emphasis. From m id-century on, b eginning w ith Achard, the abbots themselves were not te a c h e r s . They did not have a d i r e c t 3take in the d e v e l opment of le a r n in g a t the abbey. Thus i t happened t h a t C h ris tia n le a r n in g g ra d u a lly ceased to be one of the prime concerns of the canons. At th e same time the c a th e d r a l school of P a ris was becoming the b r i g h t e r 3 ta r on the h o riz o n . The r e p u ta tio n of m aster Hugh was being e c lip s e d by P e te r Lombard, th e famed "Master of the S e n te n c e s." Abbot Achard of S t. V ic to r, a b le ^ th e o lo g ia n as he was, focused h is a t t e n t i o n on the g r e a t e r issu e s which b e s e t the whole of Christendom, and the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y fo r pedagogy was l e f t to the l e s s e r b r e th re n . Most of th e w eight f e l l upon the p r i o r of the abbey. This was no t an u n s a t i s f a c t o r y arrangem ent so long as the p r i o r remained tru e to th e Hugonian id e a l of C h ris tia n s c h o la rs h ip . Un f o r t u n a t e l y t h i s did not prove to be the c ase. The l a s t p r i o r to c a rry on th e i n t e l l e c t u a l t r a d i t i o n of the found ers was R ichard, whose a b i l i t y f o r le a d e rs h ip did not 168 match h is tremendous b re a d th of le a rn in g . When he died in 1173, le a d e rsh ip of the school f e l l to th e next p r i o r , W alter of S t. V ic to r , whose a t t i t u d e toward the l i b e r a l a r t s was openly h o s t i l e . At t h i s ju n c tu re the burden of m aintaining in th e school a s p i r i t of C h r is tia n humanism f e l l to a canon of l e s s e r a u t h o r it y , Godfrey th e s u b -p r io r. G odfrey's view of knowledge and i t s ro le in the C h ristia n l i f e was sq u are ly in the Hugonian t r a d i t i o n . But Godfrey of St. V ic to r lacked th e i n t e l l e c t u a l powers of a Hugh or a Richard. P r io r W a lte r '8 a t t i t u d e of pious su sp icio n towards le a rn in g and the apparent in d if f e r e n c e of the abbot to G odfrey's p lig h t se v e re ly lim ite d the 3 u b - p r io r 's ex p ressio n of the s c h o la rly id e a l. When Godfrey f i n a l l y managed to a s s e r t h im se lf, h is reward was e x i l e . I t is perhaps n o t in a p p ro p ria te th a t w ith the a l t e r e d outlook of the sc h o o l, th e abbey i t s e l f would undergo a change in emphasis. By th e e a r ly t h i r t e e n t h cen tu ry , i t was no lo n g er regarded so much as a breeding ground f o r b ish o p s, bu t r a t h e r as a haven of c o n fe sso rs. The popes and the bishops of P a r is had s p e c i a l ly charged the V ic to r ine canons w ith th e d u tie s o f co n fesso rs and s p i r i t u a l ad v is o r s to the s tu d e n ts of th e c i t y . If an y th in g , t h i s 169 widened the i n t e l l e c t u a l h ia tu s between the School of S t. V ic to r and th e U n iv e rs ity of P a r is . The end of the tw e lf th century and the b eginning of the t h i r t e e n t h was a p erio d of d e f i n i t e d e c lin e and, one could say, decadence f o r tbe School of S t. V ic to r. The e f f i c i e n t causes were s e v e ra l and in te rtw in e d . The bad adm inistration of Abbot E rv ise and the i l l - f e e l i n g and d i s u n ity which were engendered a t t h a t time were c e r t a i n l y im portant f a c t o r s in the d e c lin e . I n t e l l e c t u a l a b i l i t i e s which had norm ally been put to c r e a tiv e purposes were now m arsh alled f o r the u p h i l l b a t t l e a g a in s t an unworthy ab b o t. The abbey school could only s u f f e r under such c o n d itio n s . A ttendant to t h i s was a c e r t a i n amount of sc a n d a l, and i t is c e r t a i n th a t the r e p u ta tio n of S t. V ic to r s u ffe re d a s e rio u s blow. The em barrassing s p e c ta c le of i n tr a n s ig e n t ignorance c re a te d by the head of the sch o o l, P r io r W alter, was a n o th e r f a c t o r in th e d e c lin e . I f Abbot Achard had earned a c o n s id e ra b le r e p u ta tio n f o r le a rn in g by engaging in le g itim a te th e o lo g ic a l d is p u te s , an a t t i t u d e such as Wal t e r ' s a n n u lle d i t s e f f e c t . As S t. Bernard and Gerhoh of R eich ersb erg had opened f i r e on Abelard in the f i r s t h a l f o f the c e n tu ry , so W alter of S t. V ic to r and Stephen of Tournai r a i l e d a g a in s t th e Lombard in the l a t t e r h a l f . 17C But the e a r l i e r p ro se c u to rs of h eresy had been b e t t e r scho l a r s than the p r i o r of S t. V ic to r . As i t tu rn ed o u t, P e te r Lombard continued to be one of th e le a d in g a u t h o r i t i e s on m a tte rs o f theolo g y , and though s e r io u s ly questioned d u r ing the 1160's and 1 1 7 0 's, h is S e n te n tia e became the most w idely-used textbook of theology in Christendom. W a lte r's u rg in g o f a posthumous condemnation of the s c h o la r seemed u n c h a r ita b le a t b e s t . When the F ourth Council of the Lateran s e t th e s e a l of approval on the Lombard, the in t e l l e c t u a l r e p u ta tio n of th e V ic to rin e abbey had a lre a d y been ru in ed by i t s e r s tw h ile p r i o r . I t was perhaps W a lte r's a t t i t u d e more than anything e ls e which caused th e V ic to rin e t r a d i t i o n to be c h a r a c te r ized as " m y s tic .” The t r a d i t i o n included profound mys tic is m — l e t th e re be no m istake — b u t t h i s c h a r a c t e r iz a t io n c e r t a i n l y f a i l s to do J u s t i c e to the r i c h , v i t a l t r a d i t i o n of C h ris tia n humanism which f lo u r is h e d a t the School of S t. V ic to r . The confusion and disagreem ent over the n atu re and purpose o f C h ris tia n le a r n in g a t the abbey led to th e aban donment of the i n t e l l e c t u a l t r a d i t i o n of i t s fo u n d ers. I t was t h i s t r a d i t i o n o f C h r is tia n humanism which had made th e s t a r of S t. V ic to r sh in e so b r i g h t l y . As the community s t e a d i l y re p u d ia te d i t s i n t e l l e c t u a l h e r i ta g e , the fame of 171 th e school r a p id ly faded. The warning o f H ild e b e rt was indeed p ro p h e tic : DThat use a f t e r a l l is hidden wisdom or b u rie d tr e a s u r e ? Is th e re any d iff e r e n c e between common sto n es and jew els i f they a re not d i s played to the l i g h t ? I t is the same w ith le a r n in g ; when one shows i t to o th e rs i t bears in c r e a s e : b u t, sco rn in g an a v a ric io u s owner, u n le ss i t is shown to the w orld, i t escapes from him. That the tw e lfth -c e n tu ry abbey of S t. V ic to r the S o ld ie r was e c lip se d in the t h i r t e e n t h by th e abbey of the V irg in , Notre Dame, would undoubtedly b o l s t e r the t h e s i s of Henry Adams. Indeed, i f we look beyond the School of S t. V ic to r , we see emerging from the old c a th e d r a l school th e U n iv e rs ity of P a r is . This nascent i n s t i t u t i o n was f a s t becoming a form idable fo rce in the i n t e l l e c t u a l m ilie u of the high middle ag es. The l a t e r V ic to rin e s had tra d e d s c h o la rs h ip f o r what they p re fe rre d to co n sid e r a p u r i f i e d C h r i s t i a n i t y . The Dominicans and F ran ciscan s had known b e t t e r . I t was the Dominicans in p a r t i c u l a r who reaped th e h a rv e s t of the Hugonian t r a d i t i o n . By th e mid t h i r t e e n t h cen tu ry th e s c h o la s t i c s had won the day. 172 APPENDIX I E p i s t l e of Laurence of W estminster to Maurice; M S B reslau Rehdigeranus 61, fo ,1 3 3 r; a ls o M S Oxford Laudianus m is c e l laneous 344, fo .4 1 v -4 2 r. P ublished in Bernhard B isc h o ff, "Aus der Schule Hugos von S t. V ik to r," in Lang, Aus der G e iste sw elt des M i t t e l a l t e r 3 (Munster, 1935). Domino e t amico suo carissim o Mauricio monacho Lauren- c iu s suus assiduam in Domino salu tem . Cepenumero, u t r e c o rd e r, a te ro g atu s sum, quatenus magistrum Hugonem de sancto V ic to re , quern e t ignotum d i l i g i s e t absentem vener- a r i s , i n t e r c e te ro s immo pre c e t e r i s frequentarem eiusque d o c t r in i s in div in o eloquio summopere in s is te re m . Cuius saluberrim e tarn p ru d e n tis v i r i ammonicionis non immemor i l ium eundem, quam c i c i u s p o t u i , precipuum ac singularem doc- torem d e le g i, e iu s doctrinam cum summa d i l i g e n c i a amplexa- tu s sum, v e l u t i cuius scienciara v i t e honestas d e c o ra t e t doctrinam raorum v e n u s ta te conditam s a n c t i t a s d o c e n tis i l - lum inat. Qui cum se n te n c ia s de d i v i n i t a t e d ic e re in c e p is - s e t , rogatus sum a p le r is q u e sociorum, qui quidem o ffic iu m , quod michi imponebant, multo f a c i l i u s i p s i p e r f i c e r e n t , s i non a l i i s f o r ta s s e im p ed iren tu r n e g o c iis , ro g a tu s , inquam, sum, quatenus ad communem tarn mei quam aliorum u t i l i t a t e m easdem se n te n c ia s s c r i p t o e t memorie commendarem. Quorum precib u s cum iam b is v e l t e r commonitus non acquiescerem , u t qui me ipsum m elius quam i p s i noveram, demum magistrum Hugonem in eadem p e tic io n e secum a d h ib u e ru n t, Qui e t hoc onus sc rib e n d i nobis i n iu n x it e t fiduciam p e r f i c i e n d i mag- na quadam a l a c r i t a t e p r o m is it. Itaque p a ru i non tam p ro - p r i i s confisus v i r i b u s , non tam v e l p ro p rie s c ie n c ie se c u r- i t a t e vel eloquencie f r e t u s v i r t u t e quam tantorum virorum p e t i c i o n i b u s , quibus n i c h i l negare fas e s t , digne s a t i s f a c - ere s o l l i c i t u s , quorum i u s t a p o s tu la c io s c ie n c ie in v a lid e robur a d i e c i t e t a s sid u a dep recacio timorem d i f f i d e n c i e p e n itu s p r o p u ls a v it. Et ne quis v e l iu s te reprehendencium v e l invide mordencium calumpnie p a t e r e t i n t r o i t u s , semel in septim ana ad magistrum Hugonem t a b e l l a s reportabam u t eius a r b i t r i o , s i quid superfluum e s 3 e t, r e s e c a r e t u r , 3i quid preterm issum , s u p p le r e tu r , s i quid v ic io s e positum , m utare- t u r , s i quid vero quandoque f o r t e f o r t u i t u bene dictum , 173 t a n t i v i r i a u c t o r i t a t e com probaretur. Taceat, ergo, ta c e a t rogo, i n i u r i o s a quibuaque bonis occursancium d e tr e c ta c io e t , quod v el nimia p u s illa n im ita s i n t e l l i g e r e p r o h ib e t v e l maligna s u b t i l i t a s prave i n t e l l i g e r e p e r s u a s e r i t , suo poc« ius a s c r ib a n t v ic io quam in hoc vel d o c e n tis impericiam v e l s c r i b e n t i a accu sen t negligenciam . Non enim me huius oper- is auctorem , aed quodammodo a r tif ic e m p r o f i t e o r . Alius enim quasi quedam sentenciarum semina i e c i t , nos ab a l i o i a c t a t a in unum velud corpus o ra c io n is quodam lab o re con- iecim ua. Si cui vero o ra c io n is n o s tre a r i d i t a s d i s p l i c u e r - i t , a tte n d a t queso nos pocius hum ili e t s im p lic i tam a l t e tamque s u b t i l i a th e o lo g ie e x p o sic io n i operam d e d isse quam r e t h o r i c i s ornam entis parum i n t e l l i g e n c e c o n fe re n tib u s e t p lu s are3 quam animum r e f i c i e n t i b u s in te n d ia s e . Ad te i g i t u r , amice c a riss im e , cui omnia debeo, hoc opusculum d i r i g e r e d e c re u i, quod, l i c e t t a n t i v i r i i l l i u s v i d e l i c e t Hugonis a u c t o r i t a t e i n n i t a t u r tamen summum auc- t o r i t a t i s sue cumulum a t t i g i s s e v i d e b i t u r , cum tu o , cuius quasi singularem e t supremum favorem e x p e c ta t, comprobatum f u e r i t examine. 174 APPENDIX II E p is to la Odonis, Morimundi p r i o r i s , ad Petrum, B i8antiae archidiaconum e t Decanum: Cambridge, T r in ity College, JfS 39 (B.16.17) f o . l v - 2 r ; P a r is , Biblioth&que N a tio n a le , L atin 3352-C, fo .8 3 v -8 5 r. Published in L. G r i l l , "Die E p is to la d e fe n sio n ia des Odo von Morimond," S tu d ia Anselniiana,L,193« 203. P e tro , C riso p o lita n e s e d is arch id iaco n o e t decano, Odo, solo nomine Morimundenses e c c le s ie p r i o r : omne t o t i u s mali contrarium . H o n e sta tis tue non in s c iu s nec immemor l i b e r a l i t a t i s , quam a f f l u e n t e r e t iocunde mihi dudum e x h ib u i3 ti, teneo te te n e ro devinctum amore, cupidus eodem te n e r i a f f e c tu amor- is te n e r i abs t e . Quod amo t e , P e tr e , e t p ro p te r h o n esta t i s tu e t i t u l o s e v e n it, e t p ro p te r impense mihi l i b e r a l i t a t i s eventum. Non e s t o b l i t a in me nec o b l i t a mihi g r a t i a o b l a t i b e n e f i c i i . Anathema mihi e s t , qui b e n e f lc ia p o st tergum pre o c u lis habet i n i u r i a s . Quod vero cupidus sum tuus d i l e c t u s e t d ic i e t f i e r i , non f i t quia mihi benefec- i s t i , sed q u ia honestatem sequendo seq u en tib u s honestatem c o m p la c u is ti. Unde carum mihi e s t carum me f i e r i persone fame C e le b ris . V otiva h e r e d ita s habere g ratia m ad eos qui multam habent g ratia m .' E stim a to r idonaeus idem r e p u ta t d i- l i g i ab honesto quod d i l i g i p ro p te r honestatem . Hoc appeto ego e t peto abs t e , s i c u t cibum in fame, fame c a n d id io ris d e sid e ro nomen, sed meritum magis: p r o p te r a l i o s nomen, meritum p ro p te r f e l i c i u s omen. Secretum meum m ihi, se c re - tum meum m ihi, .2 4 :1 6 7 Ego scio quid eleg erim . Melius e s t m ereri famam quam h ab ere, et m eliora sunt duo hec quam unum sin e a l t e r o . Sola re s e s t que f e d e re t amicos, optime s e n t i r e de so c io . E re g io n e , s i n i s t r a e stim a tio n e r e l a b i - t u r amor. Quod u t nemini nostrum de neutro nostrum even- i a t ! Habeo t i b i a liq u id d ic e r e : d i l i g e n t e r a u s c u lta . V e rid ic a r e l a t io n e cognivi a s s e r u is s e t e , quod in s e r - uarim in t r a c t a t u i l l o , quern De sacram en tis numerorum et s i g n i f i c a t i o n i b u s rerum a t t i t u l a v i , verba dura e t i n u s i t a t a e t non C atholica s a t i s . Prodam e t non celabo re lato rem : 175 Dominus meua e t p a te r meus Morimundensis abbas ip se e a t . Si s ig n i f i o a s t i , e t ipae m ihi. G ra ta n te r accepi quod e i rem a p e r u i 3 t i , cuiua e st me reg ere et d o r r ig e r e . A l i t e r accep- issem, 3i cui a l t e r i hoc f e c i s c e s . Nam hoc non f u i s s e t a r - gumentum d i l e c t i o n i s , sed e iu s r e i que, etiam me r e t i c e n t e , f a c illim e su b a u d itu r. Quamquam non p e ric u lo s i u s , immo non r i d i c u l o s i u s o b s it v e r i t a t i l a t r a t u s d e t r a h e n t i s , quam nim bus oceano, grando c a u tib u s ad am an tin is. V e rita s ubique t u t a e s t , e t ex s i quod t u t i u s e s t . M iror autem qui s i n t hi d u ri sermones, quibus s ic commotus e s t . Commoveor ego e t su p p lico tat l i t t e r i s mihi s i g n i f i c e s . A lioquin ero qua s i mutus e t non d ia p u ta n s, e t , s i aperuero os, ero a ic u t aera v erb eran s / I C o r.9 :2 6 /. Nam s i h i sunt quos a h b a ti s i g n i f i c a s t i , iam n u l l i su n t, e t ecce in pace am aritudo mea am arissim a / I s . 3 8 :1 7 /. Amen dico t i b i , P etre /M a t.26:39, Mk.19:30, I»k.22:34, J n o ,1 3 :3 8 /, quia non sum lo c u tu s , Deum es3e numerum. T ra c ta tu s i l l e adhuc apud Bellamvallem habe- t u r , e t habere p o te s , com l i b u e r i t e t cum l i c u e r i t le g e r e . Hcio e t certxis sum, quid sc rip s e rim ego. Asserui numerum e t sa p ie n tiam et verbum esse unum. C^uod a c r i p s i , s c r i p s i /J n o .1 9 :2 2 /. Nec me p e n i t e t armatum m ulta r a t i o n e , qua id probare s u ffic ia m , Quia e s t adxreraarius meus? Accedat, e t tunc lo q u a tu r! Stemu3 e t appropriemus sim ul. Dimicemus secundum legem, et in ore te stiu m statuam us in omne verbum. Collacionem enim ex a u c t o r i t a t e comperi magis p la c e re t i b i . Me siquidem p re se n te d i x i s t i , in eo d i s p l i c u i s s e t i b i l i b - ros quos d o c to r per omnia c la riss im u s Hugo d e s c r i p s i t , quod r a tio n e s o la e t non a u c t o r i t a t i b u s u te b a tu r . Geram i g i t u r in hoc quoque t i b i morem, u t a u c t o r i t a t i b u s p re ssu s e t op- p re ssu s f a t e a r i s d i c t a mea es3e dicen d a, et non esse d icen - da non esse dicendum. Augustinus in l i b r o secundo De l i b r o a r b i t r i o : /T ib .I I c h .X I/ "Multum m iro r, cum hec duo, s a p ie n tia e t numerus, s i n t in s e c r e tis s im a c e rtissim a q u e v e r i t a t e , accedente e t i am te stim o n io sc rip tu ra ru m , quo commemoravi co n iuncte i l i a p o s i t a . Plurimum m iro r, u t d i x i , quare numerus v i l i s s i t m u ltitu d in e hominum e t cara s a p i e n t i a . Sed nimirum i l l u d e s t quod una quedam eademque res e s t . ” Hucusque Augustinus. P e tre , i n t e l l e x i s t i hec omnia? Confer sermonem s e r - moni, et cerne e t d is c e rn e , s i in a l i i s l a b i i s e t a l i o sen- su lo c u tu s sum ego. N isi f o r t e qu is t r u t i n a t o r s illa b a ru m c a v i l l e t u r in eo me deceptum, quod ego numerum e t s a p i e n t i am esse unum. Augustinus unam quandam eandemque rem num erum d i x e r i t e t sap ie n tia m . 0 p e r i ti s s i m e l i t t e r a t o r u m , q u isq u is i t a s a p is in eterv* num v iv e! N ulla d ie s umquam memori te t o l l a t ab evo! Tu 176 Apollonium noatria temporibua instauribis. Tu linquia Mer- cunum, pectoribua Minervam inducea. Tamen, niai dederis iuramentum, non tibi credemu3 amplius. Augustinus in eodem l i b r o : " S a p ie n tia a b s i t , u t in com paratione num en m v e n ia tu r i n f e r i o r , cum eadera s i t , sed ocuoum quo cern i p o s s i t i n q u i r a t . " Ecce secundo d i x i t Aug u s t i n u s , ean&fm esse s a p ie n tia n cum numero. R e p e titio con- fir m a tio e s t . Item Augustinua in l i b r o Super Genesim q u a r to , c a p itu lo se x to : "Jam vero si quisquam creatam die i t e s se men8uram -etr mtmerum e t pondua, in quibus Deum omnia d i s - p o su isse sc rip tu ra t e s t a t u r , a i in i l l i s omnia d i s p o s u i t , eadem ip aa ubi d ia p o s u it? Si a l i i s , quomodo in ip a is om n i a , quando ipao in a l i i s ? Non ita q u e dubitandum e s t i l i a eaae e x tr a ea que d ia p o a ita a u n t, in quibus omnia d is p o s i t a a u n t." P e tr e , d i l i g e n t e r a tte n d e l Queso t e , responde m ihi, s i aunt h i sermones i n u a i t a t i e t d u ri? Respondebis: Utique, etiam domine. H o rru isses e t f o r a i t a n p r o s c r i p s i s s e s d ic e n - tem menauram, numerum e t pondua esse Deum. Torum hoc ex p r e s e n ti c o J l i g i s a u c t o r i t a t e , c o l l i g i s autem s i c . Nam s i , u t Augustinus t e s t a t u r , non e s t dubitandum menauram, num erum e t pondua esse e x tr a ea que d i s p o s i t a s u n t, e t in solo Deo d i s p o s i t a s u n t, quecumque d ia p o a ita s u n t. Unde Iterum Augustinus in l i b r o Super Genesim q u a rto , c a p itu lo q u a rto : "N ih il a liu d dictum i n t e l l i g l t u r , quomodo per cor e t l i n - guam humanam p o t u i t , omnia in mensura e t numero e t pondere d i s p o s u i s t i , n i s i omnia in te d i s p o a u i s t i ." Quid eviden- c iu a , P etre ? Quid e x p re ssiu s? S u f f ic iu n t i s t a , an manifea- t i o r a et maiora d e s id e ra s ? Grandia aunt hec, quod numerus e t s a p ie n ti a 3ur.t unum. G randia, quod menaura, numerus e t pondua Deus e a t . Sed v e r i t a s hec, u t Augustinus a i t , ocu- luro quo c e rn i p o s a it i n q u i r i t . Qui non i n t e l l i g i t , cur mihi m olestus e 3 t, cur calu m p n iatu r, a i v e r ita te m d ic o , s i testim onium p ro fe ro ? Utique iam non e s t murmur e iu s c o n tra me, sed co n tra Auguatinum. Auctore cum ta n to me queso pa- t i a t u r e r r a r e et d ic e re sermones duros e t i n u s i t a t o s . Que cum i t a s i n t , cave, mi P e tre , ne animus a numeris re la p su s v o l u t e t quasi im ag in arias forma3, cum auuiB sapientia.m e s se numerum et mensuram, e t numerum e t pondus e3se Deum. Non enim dictum e s t de h is num eris, m ensuris e t ponderifcus, quos e t quas e t que v e l im aginari possumus v e l i n t u e r i . A ugustinus, c a p itu lo q u in to , lib r o q u a rto , Super Geneaim ad l i t t e r a m : "Omnia mensure, numeri e t p o n d e ris, q u isq u is non n i s i v i s i b i l i t e r n o v it, s e r v i l i t e r n o v i t ." Idem in eodem, c a p itu lo q u a rto : "Secundum id quod novimus, mensuram in e is que metimur, e t numerum in e is que numeramus, e t pondus in e is que appendimus, non e s t Deus i s t a . Secundum vero id 177 quod mensura omni r e i modum p r e f i g i t , e t numerus omni r e i speciem p r e b e t, e t pondus omnem rem ad quietem ac s t a b i l i - tatem t r a h i t , i l l e p rim itu s et v e r a c i t e r e t s i n g u l a r i t e r i s t a e s t , qui term in at omnia e t format omnia et o rd in a t om nia." Tota hec d i s p u t a t i o , mi P e tre , catholicum sensum fun- dat e t d a t, s i studiosum habeat discussorem , qui d i d i c e r i t mel suggere de p e tr a oleumque de saxo durissim o /D e u t.3 2 : 137. D iligentem inquam d i l i g i t auditorem , quod d i c i t u r De us non s im i l i t u d i n e re s p e c tu a , non s i g n i f i c a t i o n e f i g u r a r - um, sed p rim itu s e t v e r a c i t e r et s i n g u l a r i t e r esse mensura, numerus e t pondus. Utique m ire r is e ru d itis sim o s v ir o s in v e rb is verum q u e s is s e , non v erb a. Vide quid d ic a t Dyonia- ius in I e r a r c h i a , c a p itu lo t e r t i o decimo, de d iv i n i s nomin- ib u s: "Deus neque anima e s t , neque mens, neque ostensionem au t gloriam a u t sermonem a u t i n t e l l i g e n t ia m h a b e t, neque sermo e s t neque i n t e l l i g e n t i a , neque d i c i t u r neque i n t e l l i - g i t u r . Neque numerus e s t neque ordo, neque magnitudo neque n i n o r a t i o , neque a e q u a lita s neque s im ilitu d o aut i n s i m i l i - tudo. Neque s t a t neque m ovetur, neque s ile n tiu m a g i t neque habet v irtu te m . Neque v i r t u s e s t neque lux neque v i t a e s t , neque s a c rif ic iu m e s t neque seculum, neque tempus neque ta c tu s e s t ip s iu s i n t e l l i g i b i l i s . Neque d i s c i p l i n a neque v e r i t a s e s t neque regnum neque s a p ie n ti a nec u l l a nec u l- l i u s b e n ig n ita s ; neque s p i r i t u s e s t neque f i l i a t i o neque J ia te rn ita s nbque a l i u s quid nobis a u t a l i i c u i l i b e t non ex- is te n tiu m ." Q,ue u ltim a c la u s u la quo sensu c e te ra prem issa sunt a c c ip ie n d a m a n if e s ta t, quia v i d e l i c e t n i h i l horum De us e s t eo modo quo a nobis s e n s i b i l i t e r v e l in t e r p o s i t i o n e imaginationum v e l a l t e r i u s r e i co g n isc u n tu r a n o b is. Sunt a l i a te stim o n ia que, s i l i c u i s s e t , i n te r p o s u is - sem. Sed tempus meum tempus f a c i e n d i , non tempus f a c ie n d i, non tempu3 r a t i o c i n a n d i . S c ie n tie preponimus v irtu te m , quia regnum Dei non e s t in i l i a sed in i s t a , et d i v i n i t a t i i u s t i t i a m quam scie n tia m propriorem credim us, p r o p te r quod e t loquim ur. Tempus e s t obice s i l e n t i i fluentem cohibere sermonem. Sed te p lu s o rav e ro , u t s i quid a liu d e s t unde f o r s i t a n movearis l i t t e r i s nobis a p e r i a s . Sic r e t i n e b i s quem f e c i s t i amicum. Non quod quid asperum s c r i p s i s s e me paveam, sed quia non omnium e s t i n t e l l i g e n t i a , e t un u sq u is- que in suo sensu abundat secundum g ra tia m e iu s , qui d i v i d i t s in g u l i s p ro u t v u l t , Cui lau s et b e n e d ic tio a primo h e r i usque ad ultimum eras ac deinceps sin e f i n e . V ale, e t b e n e se n ti de to optime s e n tie n te e t opido te s i t i e n t e . Amen. 176 APPENDIX I I I V a ria tio n s on the A r i s t o t e l i a n d iv is io n of knowledge B o e th iu s: PHILOSOPHY * rT h e o re tic a l P r a c t i c a l { I n t e l l e c t i b l e r A rithm etic I n t e l l i g i b l e <4 Astronomy I Geometry N atu ral I Music rSolitai-y (e th ic s ) - (P riv a te (economics) VPublic ( p o l i t i c s ) Hug£ z l V i c t o r : T h e o re tic a l FHILOSOPHY - P r a c t ic a l Mechanical \L o g i i c a l /■Theology /A rithm etic -I Physics I Geometry ^Mathematics HAstronomy VMusic /S o lita r y ( e th ic s ) -lP riv ate (economics) (p u b lic ( p o l i t i c s ) Fabric-m aking Armament Commerce A g ric u ltu re Hunting Medicine T h e a tric s /Grammar /D em onstration rufeoectic I Argume n t-j Brobsble aiganent{itoe t oric (S o p h istic 179 Dorcinicus G u n d issa lin u a t S c ie n tia e e lo q u e n tia e E c ie n tia l i t t e r a l i s : Grammatica HUM ANA - SC3ENTIA r s c i Isci rP o e tic a ie n tia e civiles-j (.Rhet o ric a S c ie n tia media: Logica S c ie n tia e ^ a a p ie n tia e rPhysica P h ilo so p h ia th e o ric a -J Mathematica vTheologica r P o l i t i c a t.philosophia p r a c t i c a 4 Oeconomica LEthica D IVINA SCIENTIA 3i&S&££ Z L L Z Z iZ Z L 1 2 Z L centuryi /M etaphysics I r Astronomia PHILOSOPHIA NATURALIS-IMathematica -jGeometria I [A rith m e tic s VPhysica iMusica /T h eo lo g ia s -lY potica (0< J P o l i t i c a (.Ethica (si'' Theologia s u p e r n a tu r a lis PHILOSOPHIA PRACTICA -|Y potica (Oeconomica?) SIVE KORALIS Lve M onastics) /R h e to ric s PHILOSOPHIA RATT0NAL3E Grammatica iLogica For f u r t h e r d is c u s s io n of the d iv is io n of knowledge and th e v a rio u s schem ata, see M artin Grabmann, Die G eschichte der s c h o la s tis c h e n Methode (F re ib u rg , 1 9 11),11,28-54. 180 APPENDIX IY The Tchool of S t. Vi c t o r and the C h r is to lo g ic a l D isputes Rodberti X r ik e la d e n s is , Speculum P i d e i , 111,5. De hoc quod a u c to r huiuo l i b r i P a r is iu s perhendinans p u b lice Petrum hereticum denom inavit, e t cum quodam d is c ip u lo e iu s , de eo quod Deus e t homo una per3one e s t c o n t u l i t et obmutescere f e c i t . (MS Cambridge, Corpus C h r is ti College 330, fo .62v- 6 3 r. Published in R. W. Hunt, ’’E n g lish Learning in the Late Tw elfth C e n tu ry ,” T ran sactio n s of the Royal H is to r i c a l S o c ie ty , XIX (1936), 19-42. Sed d i c e t a l i q u i s : "Quis es tu , qui tantum virum p er- se q u e ris mortuum, c\un quo c o n fe rre non auderes vivo?" " Im- mo audebam," d ic o , "e t in sua c i v i t a t e , id e s t P a r is i u s , ubi docebat, hereticum eum esse p a te n te r pronunciabam. Testes michi sunt domnus Achardus p o stea A b ricen sis e p is- copus, e t domnus Rodbertus H e r e fo r d e n s is , qui tunc tem poris P a r is iu s e r a n t, qtxando i b i perhen d in an s, eum hereticum esse p u b l i c e affirmabam; e t cum p o tio rib u s d i s c i p u l i s eiu s con- t u l i , ad me u t d e d ic i, ab eo m is s is . Meminit enim me dom- num Rogerum, qui nunc e s t TT ig o rn e n si3 episco p u s, v e n isse ad hoapicium nostrum . Q,uem cum in terro g assem apud quern in d i- vin a pagina s t u d e r e t , e t r e s p o n d is s e t, "Apud magistrum Ro- bertum Meldunensem." " P e rp la c e t," inquam, "timebam enim, ne te t e n e r e t inviscatum h e r e tic u s i l l e . " ^uod audiens quidam de p o tio rib u s d is c i p u l i 3 e iu s , (sed nomen taceo) qui cum domnum Rogero, u t o p in o r, ex i n d u s t r i a v e n e r a t. "In quo," i n q u i t . " h e r e tic u s e s t m a g iste r P etru s?" "In m u l t i s ," in quam. "Unum," i n q u i t , " p r o f e r a t u r . " "S eparat" inquam "ho- minem a Deo, u t non s i t una persona homo cum Deo in T r in i- t a t e , qui rev era f i l i u s Dei e s t . " "Non i r t e l l i g i 3 " in q u it "quoroodo hoc dictum s i t . " "Nec in te llig a m " inquam "in v i t a mea quia hoc h e r e s i s e s t pessima et d e t e s t a b i l i s ." "Audi" inquam "me p a t i e n t e r , e t ego renerabo t ib i v e r ita te m ." "Ver i t a s " inquam "audienda e s t , e t semper amanda." "N osti" i n q u it "albedinem es3e in corpore, et non c o n fe rre c o rp o ri u t 181 s u b sta n c ia s i t . ” Et ego "Scio" inquam "quo te n d a s. Non hoc modo michi ex em p lifir.a b is. Loquimur enim de duabus na- t u r i s , d iv in a s c i l i c e t et humana, et tu in d u cis de n a tu ra exemplum, e t de a c c id e n te , quod nec i n t e r n aturaa computa- t u r . Si v is michi e x e m p lific a re , indue exemplum de duabus n a t u r i s , s ic u t loquimur de duabus n a t u r i s . Quod s i n e s c is , ego inducam. S ic u t anima r a t i o n a l i s e t caro unus e s t homo, i t a Deus e t homo unus e s t C h ristu 3 ." " I ta " in q u it ipse "quod n u llo modo i t a . " Et ego "Si n u llo modo" inquam " i t a Deus e t homo unus e s t C h ristu s , u t anima r a t i o n a l i s et caro unus e3t homo, tunc non i t a . Sed i t a e t non i t a tantum sibi c o n tr a d ic u n t, quod simul esse non p o ssu n t. Itaque san cta Dei e c c l e s i a c a th o lic a c a n it cum plena fid e p e r universum orbem te rra ru m , i t a Deus e t homo unus e s t C h ris tu s . Here t i c ! vero in c o n v e n tic u lis s u is p e r s tr e p u n t, d ic e n te s non i t a . " Hoc ita q u e concluso eermone obmutuit i l l e c o rfu su s. Qui vero tunc a d e ra n t sane s a c ie n te s c o n t r a t u la n tu r m ichi. Itaque f i d e l i t e r firm aterq u e credendum e t confitendum e 3 t, quia dominus n o s te r Jesus C h ris tu s , secundum quod Deus e s t , f i l i u s Dei e s t e t c r e a to r omnium creaturarum ; secundum quod homo e s t , f i l i u s hominis e s t , fa c tu s c r e a t u r a , u t creaturam re d im e re t. 182 B IB L IO G R A PH Y Manuscripts Jean Bouin, Memorials h istoriaru n . M S P aris, Bibliothfeque N ationals, Latin 15010-15011. Jean Picard, Chronicon B cclesiae V ictorinas. M S P aris» Bflb- lioth&que National* Latin 14366, 14367, 14660, 14685* Jean of Thoulouse, Annales abhattales ec cle sia e Sancti Vic* to r ts Parislenses" M S P aris, Bifeliothfcque N a tio n a l Latin 14368-143^4. — .Anttouttatua r e g a lls abbatiae Sancti V lctoris llb r i duo- decln. M S P aris, Bibliothfcque Nationals, Latin 14375* t t TTS. Simon Gourdan, Vies e t aaxiaes saln tes dee hoames lllu s tr e s de S ain t-V ictor. M S ParlsT Bibliotlbfeque N ationals, Fran- $ a ise 22396*22401. P rincipal works and a r tic le s consulted d’Alrerny, M arle-Thlrese, "Achard de S aint-V ictor. De Trln. ita te — De u n itate et plural i t ate creaturanjun. " Recher* ohes de th?ologie anclenne et aSSIfrraie, XXI (l954l2$S-306 — second coaaentaire de fHoaas C allus, abbe de V ereell, sur le Cantique dee Cantlques," Archives d, h lsto ir e doc tr in a l et l l t t l r a l r e du aoyen fige.X I I I (1^40-421391-401. ' Aape, A ., "Het onwitgegenen werk van Richard van St-V iet or," O ne g e e s te lljk Erf, X X V (1951),289-292. Bale, John, Scrlptorua lllu s tr iu a aajoris Brltannlae quaa Anglian et Scotlaa Tocant C a ta lo g u s(B a sle .1^57). Baron, Roger, "Hugues de Saint-V ictor estw il 1 ’auteur d’un coaaentaire de la Rfcgle de S t. Augustine?" Reeherehes de scien ces r e llg le u s e s . XLIII (1955),342-360. —"L*influence de Hugues de Saint-V ictor," Reeherehes de th lo lo g ie anclenne e t l£ d i£ r a le ,x x il (1955),56-71. 183 —"Btude sur 1*a u th en ticity de l'oeuyre de Hugues de Saint- Victor d'aprfcs lee MSS. Faria lia s.717, B.5.14506 et Douai 360-366," Scriptorium, X (1956),182-220. — "Textes sp ir itu a ls in id its de Hugues de S a in t-V icto r,” Mllangea de scien ce r e llg le u a e .X III (1956),162-178. — •*l*esth6tTque de ttugues de Saint-V ictor," Les 6tudee phll- osophioues.XII (1957),434-437. —Science et sagease ches Hugues de Salnt-V lctor (B aris, — "Note aur une prospect ion de aanuscrits dans quelques bibliothfeques d'Burope eentrale," B u lletin de la Socl^ tf Internationale pour 1* 6tude de la philosophic BidlflTals. IV (1962),129-131. — "Richard de Saint-V ictor a - t - i l d crit l e De oontemplatl- one et eius apeolebua?" Reeherehes de sciences r e l l g l ~ eusea. l (1^62;,^0^-424. Baudoux, B ., "Philosophia Anoi11a Theaioglas." Antonianum, X X X V (1960),323-327. B iachoff, B ., "Aus der Schule Hugos Ton S t, V ik tor,” Aus der O eiatesw elt des M ittela lters (Munster,1935). Bonnard, Fourier, H istoire de l*abbaye royale et de l*ordre des chanolnes r$guliera d e Saint-V ictor de B aris, 2 t o I . TParia7i507TT --------- -------------------------------------- Bonnetty, A ., "le Pons philosophise de Oodefroi de Saint- V ictor, ou de 1•enseigneaent philoaophique et thrfologique au dousibne sid c le ," Annalea de philosoohie chr£tienne. V II,6 (1874),201-262. --------------------------------- de Breul, Jacques, Thdfttre des A ntiquites de Baris (P aris. 1612). — B ria l, "Andr^, chanolne r lg u lie r de S. V ictor do Paris," H istoire llt t y r a ir e de la France.X III (B a ris,1834) — "Geofroi, sous-prleur de Sainte-Barbe et Oodefroi, chan- oine r lg u lie r de St-V iotor de Baris," H istoire littd r a ir e de la Francs,XY (P a r is ,1820). Calandra, Gregorio, De h isto r ie s Andrae V Ictorlni "Bxnosi- tlon e in B cclesia stsn " {Palermo.1948). C allus, D.A., "A n unknown commentary of Thomas Oallus on tbs Pseudo-Dionyslan l e t t e r s ,” Dominican S tu d ies. I (1948),58-73 184 Caaauto, Storia d ella Letteratura Ebralca Poatbibllca (Flo rence, 1938). C avaliers, Ferdinand, "lea De aacrynentea d'Hugues de Saint- Victor* rapporta du Dialogue e t du Trait#," Italletin de ^ itlratu re ec o lla ia a tiq u e, (1940),207-210. C h itilio n , Jean, "Aehard de Saint-V ictor et lea controver- aea chriatologiquea du X lle a lle le ," Milangee terdlnand Ca-vallera (Toulouse, 1948)pp.317-337, —*Ee cotii'enu, 1* authentic it # et la date du Liber exceptio ns., et des Sermones centum de Richard de S a in t-V icto r,■ Revue du moyen fL g ela tin ,IV (1948) ,23-52) 343-366. —"un aernon thlologique de Gauthier de Saint-V ictor #gar# paral le s oeuvres du prieur Richard," Revue du aoyen &ge la t ln .V IIl (1952),43-50. —"Be Guillaume de Champeaux a Thoaaa Gallua," Revue du aoyen tire la t ln .V IIl (1952),139-162) 247-272. — **Achar3de Saint-Victor et le De dlacretlone aniaae. apir- itua et aontla," Archives d^iatolre doctrlnale ei llt- tlralre du aoyen 8ge»XXXf (l6 # 4 ),9 -3 5 . — "Sermona et prddioaieurs Victorina de la seconde a o iti# du X lle a lle le ," yrchivea d 'h latolre doctrlnale et l i t - dans 1*oeuvre or- i m j r --------------------- Chaufple, J .-G ., "Achard de St-V ictor," Nouveau Dictionnalxe hlatorique et g rltlou e pour aervir de euppidaent ou de continuation au D lctlonnalre de M . Pierre Bayle. i l (Am - sterdaa,1750). “ Chenu, M.-D., "Grammaire e t th lo lo g ie auxXEIe et XHIe s l id e s ," Archives d 'h ia to ire doctrlnale et li t t l r a i r e du moyen figeTX (1935[75-55. ------------------ "^’no™5 • t J* nature* p erspectives sur la renaissance du X lle aid cle," Archives d lh la to lre doctrlnale et l i t t l a i r e du aoyen a g e.x K (1952) .39-66.--------------------------- a-------------- Oilment, P ., "Hugues de S t-V ictor," H istoire li t t l r a i r e de la Prance,XII (P a r is,1869). '— C lerval, A ., Lea Icolea de Chartres au aoyen fUte (P aris. 1895). —L1enaelgneaent dea arte llberaux | Chartrea et & Paris dans la prdaldre a o lile du x t l e s l i d e , dlaprSs l^ e p ta - teuchon de Thierry de Chartrea (P aris, 1889;. Croydon, P .P ., "Notes on the L ife of Hugh.of Saint V ictor," Journal S i Theological Studies.XL (1939),232.252. 185 — "Abbot Laurence of Westminster and Hush of Saint V ictor," Mediaeval and Renaissance S tu d ies,II (1951),169-171. D albles, "Le moment de la lib e r te ," Revue Thomiste,XLVIII (1948),189-190. — "Le futurisme chez Hugues de Saint-V ictor et Pierre L om bard," Revue Thomiste XLVIII (1948),447-458. Damon, P h ilip , "The Preconium Augustini of Godfrey of Saint V ictor," Mediaeval siu A les.XXn (I960) .92-107. DeBrandere, M., "Hugo van Sint-V iktor a le kulturer-paeda- goog," Vlaamsch opvoedkundlg ti.1 d sch rlft.XXIV (1943),231- 252. Delhaye, P hilip pe, "Nature et grace chez Geoffroy de Saint- V ictor," Revue du moyen Sge la t in .I I I (1947),225-244. - - "L*enseignement“Z e la philosophie morale au X lle sifecle," Mediaeval Studies,X I (1949) < — #te sens l i t i e r a l et le sens allegorique du Mierocosmus de G eoffroi .de Saint-V ictor," Recherohes de t£?olo«ie an clenne et medi£vale,XVI (1949) ,15!>-i60. — »tie "KTcrocoamus* de Godefroy de Saint-V ictor* I - Edition critiq u ef II • Itu H eth lologiq u e (!t.ilie, 1951). — "Godefroy de St-V ictor," Arehivum Franciscanum Historicum. XLIV (1951),459f. — "Les sermons de Godefroy de Saint-V ictor," Reeherehes de th lo lo g le anclenne et m ^dllvale.XXI (l954),l£4-& 47. —L*organisation ecolaTre au X lle slfecle (L ouvain-L ille, 1961). — "Brvise ou Em is de Saint-V ictor," D ictionnalre d* histoire et de geographic ecc ie sla a tiq u e.XV (P a ris,1963) D en ifle,H ., "Quel liv r e serv a it de base & l'enseignem ent des m aitres en theologie dans l* u n iv ersite de Paris?" Revue Thom iste,II (1894),149-161. Dereine, C., "Vie commune, rdgle de Saint-Augustin et chan- oines r£gu liers au Xle si& cle," Revue d *histoire e c c lla i- a stio u e .XLI (1946),365-406. D erling, C.G., D lsserta tio inauguralis philosophies de H u- gone a S. V ictore comite Blanckenburgensl (kelm stadt. 1745) D esbols, Aubert de la Chesnaye, "Achard de Saint-V ictor," D ictionnalre de la n o b le sse,! (P a r is,1770). 186 Deatrea, J ., La "Pecla" dans lea manuacrita univeraltalrea du XUIa et~% IVe aldclea (Parla'.'lS35VI Deutache, M.S.M., "A dam de S a in t-V icto r," Realencyclopadle fur proteatantiache Theologle,I (L eipsig,1854). Dickinson, J .C ., The Orlgina of the Austin Canons and Their Introduction Into England (London,1050). Dondaine, A ., "U n manuacrlt de l ' Bxpoaitio de Thomas Gallua sur lea cinq prrfini&rea le ttr e s du Pseudo-Denys»N Reeherehes de theologle anclenne et m£didTale,XVII (1950),311-318. Doucet, V ictorin , "Philippe Delhaye, Le Mlcrocoamua de God- efrov de S aint-V ictor. Etude Theologlaue." Archirum Fran- B la io rfc^ .jC LirTIgsTTTisS?.--------- --------------------- Dr eves, gtinmen aua Marla laach.XXIX (1885),278-306f416-441 DuCange, Index auctorua in Qloaaarlvun mediae et inflmae la t ln it a t la (jter is,18557. Rimeige, Gereais, Richard de Saint-V ictor et l ' l d l s chrd- tlenne de l'ampuiT (fa r la . 1982)I Dupont, B«, "Achard de Saint-V ictor," D ictionnalre d 'h ia- to lr e et glographie eccld aiaatiq u e, I (P a r is,1012). l'B p in ola, Henri de, "D e l'enseignem ent de la philosophia et de la littlr a tu r e palennea aux Xle et X lle s ie c le s , et de l'o p p o sitio n que lu i flr e n t lea docteura cath ollq u ea," Annalea de phlloaophie chrftienne,X VII,4 (1885)*181-215. Fabriciua, Bibliotheca la tin a mediae et inflmae a eta tia (P atayii,l*764). -------------- F e r et.P ,, la fa cu lty de theologle 1 Paris et ses docteura lea plua o6l6brea, I (P aris,1894)? F la h iff, G.B., "E ccleaiaatical Censorship of Books in the Twelfth Century," Mediaeral Studies,IV (1942),1-23. Fleury, Claude, H iatoire eccld aiaatiq ue.XXI (P a r is,1691- 1738). Fohlen, Clauds, e d ., H iatoire de Beaanpo n ,I (P a r is,1964). 187 Fournlfoe, "Andrd, ohanoine r^gulier de St-V ictor," Dietlop- naire d 'h isto lr c et de gdographie e c cld sia stiq u e, i l (fra^~ r l s , l 9 i i ) . Franklin, A lfred, H istoire de la blbliothfeoue de 1 'abbaye de Saint-V ictor & Paris (ParTiulBCS). Oautier, Lion, Oeuvres podtloues d’Adaa de Saint-V ictor, prlcdddes d*un essaT s u r sa vTe e i ses ouvragea. £ v o l. (Paris ,1^56 ](3r3e<I. ,18947 — 'Ift llttd ra tu re cathollque et nationals ( L ille ,1894). Ohellinck, J, de, "La table de la premiers Edition des oeu*> res de Hugues de Saint-V ictor," Reeherehes de sciences r e llg le u s e s ,I (1910),270-289; 385-304. — "U n catalog des oeuvres de Hugues de Saint-V ictor," Revue ndo-8Colastique,XX (1913),226-239. —le aouvcaent tTilologique au X lle sl& cle (B ru ssels-P aris, T?457T G ilson, Etienne, History of Christian Philosophy in the M id dle Ages (Hew York, 191)577 —Reason and Revelation in the Middle Ages (Hew York,1938). G lorieux,P ., "Le Contra quatuor labyrlnthos Franciae de Gauthier de S a ln t-V lcto r,r Archives ch h lstolre doctrlnale et lltt^ r a lr e du aoyen age,jEiX (1942)7169-338. —*3ssai sur le s Quaestiones in ep lsto la s Pauli du Pseudo- Hugues de S a in t-V icio r,- Reeherehes de theologle anclenne et afdifvale.X IX (l9 8 2 ),45^55^ —ir fiauval8 action et mauvaise tra v a ils le Contra quatuor labyrlnthos Franciae," Reeherehes de thdologle anclenne e i aedi3vaTe,XXI (1954)7I73TI957 ------------- Grabaann, Martin. Geschlchte der echolastichen Methods.I I (Freiburg,1911J• G r ill, P#L., "Die E p istola d efen sion is des ersten c is te r - elensischen Zahlenaysiikers O do von Mbriaond," Stadia Anselalana.L ,193-203. Griveau, R ., "Geoffroi de Saint-V ictor et la d4cad*nce des VIctorinB d la fin du X lle s l i d e , " P ositions des T hlses, Ecole Hatlonale des Chartres (P aris, 1902$). H iring, H.M., "The Case of G ilbert de la Porrle, Bishop of P o itiers (1142-1154)," Mediaeval S tu d ie s,X IIl(l9 5 l),4 0 ff. — "The So-called Apologia de Verbo Incarnato," Franciscan Studies,XVI (1956),102-143. 188 — "Gilbert of P o itie r s , author of the D e d iscretio n s ani- mae, sn irltu a et Mentis commonly attributed to Achard of Saint Victor*" Mediaeval Studies XXII (i960),148-191. Haurtfau, B ., Les oeuvres de Hugues de S alnt-V ictori essa i critiq u e (P aris,1886)• —SoITces”®t e x tra its de quelques manuscrits la tin s de la fllbjlothlque n ation als (P aris,1890-lS$3). —H istoire llttS r a ir e du Maine, I (B aris, 1843). Hayen, A ., "Le Consile de Reims et l«erreur thtfologique de G ilbert de la Porr6e," Archives dfh lsto ir e doctrlnale et litt^ r a ir e du moyen ftge.X (1935),29-102. Hugonln, P ., "Essai sur la fondation de l 'l c o le de Saint- Victor de Paris," P£,CLXXV,40-44. B int, R.W., "English learning in the la te Twelfth Century," Transactions of the Royal H isto rica l Society,XIX (1936), 19-42. Hurter, Homenolator L itter a riu s. i l (0eniponte,1906). J avelet, R ., "Psyehologie des auteurs sp ir itu e ls du X lle s ie c le ," Revue des scien ces r e llg ie u s e s .XXXIII (1959), 97-164i — "Thomas Gallus et Richard de S aint-V ictor, mystiques," Reeherehes de th^ologie anclenne et m6di6vale.XXIX (1962L 206-233• ———— . Klibansky, R ., "The Rock of Parmenidess Medieval Views on the Origin of D ia le c tic ,• Medieval and Renaissance Stud ie s , I (1941-1943),178-186. Knox, Ronald A ., The B e lie f of C atholics (London,1927). — In Soft Garments (London.l?4lTT L aistner, M.L.W., Thought and L etters in Western Europe, A. D. 500 to 900 (London,193i). — Chris tia n ity and Pagan Culture in the Later Rom an Empire (New York,195lTT ----- Landgraf, A., "Spekulatlv-theologisch Brttrterung der hypo- sta tlk Vereinigung," Z e itso h r ift f&r catholische Theolo- gle.IXV (1941),183-21?; — 5ie Quaestiones super ep isto la s san cti Pauli und die Al- le g o r la e ,* Collectanea R anciscana.XVI-XVII (1946-1947TT 189 — "Das Problem Utrum Chriatua fu e r lt homo in trlduo mortis in der PrtihacboiaatAk.* itflangea Amguste^Pelaer (Louvain. 1947J. —Einftihrung in die Oeaohiohte der thedLogiachen Literatur djeryrflRachoTaatTk " nK£IgEonni7l 94AT. ” --------------------- L aslc, Dionysius, Hugonla de Sanoto Victore theologia per- fe c tlv a , eJua fundamentum phlloaophicum ac the o'log! cum (Rome#1956). Lebeuff Jean, De l*d tat dee scien ces en Prance depute la mort du Robert (P a r is,1 7 4 l). Leclercq, J ., "Le De grammatiea de Huguea de S a in t-V icto r," Archives d1hi a to lr e doc tr 1nale et littd r a lr e du moyen M e. XlV (1343-1945),263-5551 — "Auteur des M iscellanea attrib u es & Huguea de Saint-V ic tor," Revue d'aacdtlclsw e et de m ysticism e.XXV (1949), 2 9 9 .3 0 F I Lejay, P ., "Lea t r a it /s a ttrib u te 4 A dam de Saint-V ictor," Revue d’h ia to ire et de lit e r a t u r e r e lig ieu a e,IV (1899), 161-166. Lewis, C .S., The Allegory of Love (Hew York,1958). LeLong, Bibliotheca Sacra,I I (P a r is,1723). L ottin, 0 ., "Questions in d d its de Hugues de Saint-V ictor," Recherohes de thdologle ancienne et medidvale.XXVII (1960) 42-66. Luchaire, A ch illa, "Lea R ecueils E p isto la ires de l'Abbaye de Saint-V ictor," Bibllothfcque de la P&cultd dea L ettres, VIII (1899). M abillon, Vetera an alecta.I (P a r is,1723). H alingre, Claude, Lee Antiquitea de la v i l l e de Paris (Par i s , 1640). Mart&ne.E. ft Durand,U,, Voyage littd r a ir e de deux bdnddic- t ln e s .I I (P a r is,1724). Martin, R.-M., "Notes sur 1*oeuvre littd r a ir e de Pierre le Mangeur," Recherchea de thdologie anclenne et mddidvale. I l l (1931)755-57; -------------------------------------- 190 Ifathoudt Huguea, "Observattones des Sententiae de Robert Pulleyn," PL,CIXXXVI,1044. Michaud, E ., Guillaume de Champeaux et le s fo o les de Parts au X lle slfecle <j*aprfes d es'documents Inedits (P a rts,3667). Mtgnon, A ., Ims origln es de la soolastique et Hugues de Saint-V ictor (P a r is,10957. Mlnuto, G., "Preludi di una teo ria del h ello in Ugo da S. V ittore," Actum. XXVI (1952),289-308. M tsset, E ., "Potfsie rjr.thmique au moyen ftges essat p h ilo lo - gtque et lit t & a lr e sur le s oeuTres p olitiq u es d’A dam de Saint-V ictor," Lettree chr£tiennesi Revue d’enselgnemcnt, de p h ilo lo g ie et de critiq u e (!ParIs,ll6IT. M isset,E.,& Aubry,P..Melanges de musicologje c r itlq u e i le s proses d♦ Adam de Saint-V ictor (^ a r is,1900). M ollat, G., "A dam de Saint-V ictor," Dictionnalre d 'h isto ir e et de geographic eccl^ sia a tiq u e.I (£ a ris,1 9 1 2 ). Montfaucon, B. de, B ibliotheca bibliotheearum menuscriptor- u m nova,I I (P a r is,1739}. Moore, P hilip S ., "The Authorship of the A llegorise super Vetus et Novum Test amen turn," New Scholasticism . IX (i$3Sn. 5091525. Moreri, L ., "Achard de Saint-V ictor," Le grand diction nalre h isto riq u e,I (P a r is,1759). Morin, Germain, "U n tr a its faussement attribud It A dam de S a in t-V icto r," Revue b fr /’ d ie tin e .XVI(1899) .218-219. — "Le commentaire sur Nabum du £seudo-Julien, une oeuvre de Richard de Saint-Victor?" Revue b^n^dictine.XXXVH (1925) 404-405. — "U n tr a lt^ inddit d'Achard de Saint-V ictor." Aus der Q elstesw elt des M lttela lters (Munster,1935),pp.$51-262. Naudaeus, G., De a n tlq u lta te et d lg n lta te scholae medloae p a rlslen sle TParis,1628). Negri, L ., "Poesla e m istica in Riccardo di San Vattorei la tecn lca compositive del De IV gradibus v io le n tia e ca rita - t ie ," Convivium.XXIII (155577522-532. 191 Ott, Ludwig, "Unterauchungen sur theologischen B r ie flite r a - tur der Frtthscholastik,* Beltrftge aur Qeachichte der Phil" osophie und Theologie dea M ittela ltera .XXXIV (1936).549- Z& K -•"Hugo Ton Saint Viktor und die KirchenTAter,"Dirua Thomas (Freiburg), XXVII (1949),180-200; 293-332. — "Sententiae magiatrl Hugonis P a rleien eie, " Recherchea de theologie anclenne et medlrfVale,x3cVll(i960) ,29-41. OttaTiano, C., "Riccardo di San V ittore. La Tita, le opere, i l penaiero," M en ^rie d ella R. Accademia naaionale del L in cel. claaee 31 Sclenze m orail, atorlche et fllo io g lc h e Ser. IV .T .iV .faae.S (liom e,l933). Oudin, Caaimir, Commentarlua de acriptoribue e c c le a ia a tic le (L eip zig ,1722). Pare,G ., Brunet, A. ,& Tremblay, P ., La renaissance du X lle ale c ite Lea ifcolea et l^naeignem ent (Tar is-b iia w a , 1955). Parent,J.-M ., La doctrine de la creation dana l«£cole de Chartres (Pari8-6ttawa»l$3§7. P aris,G ., "Lettre & It.Leon Gautier aur la T ersif icatlon la t - ine rythmique," Biblloth&que de l ' l c o l s dea Chartrea.XXyn (1866),578-610. P ennotti, G abriel, Generalls totiu a sacri ordlnle clerlcanaa canonicorum historTa tr ip a r tita (Rome, 16&5). P ita .J ea n ,Relationum historicarum de rebus a n g lic ia . I (Par i s , 1619). P oole,R .L ., Illu stra tio n s of the History of Itedlaeyal Thought (London, 1$34). Poppenberg,E.,Die Chrlatologie des Hugo yon S t.V ictor (H ll- trup,1937), Preger,W .,Geachlchte der deuta chen Mystik lm M itte la lte r .I (L eip zig,18 7 4 ).' " " Pr4roat,M.,"Achard de S aint-V ictor," D ictionnalre de b io- graphie fra n $ a ise,I (P a r is,1933). Rand, B. K . , Jounde rs of the Middle Ages (Cambridge Maas.,1928) Rathbone,E.»• John of Cornwall* a B rief Biography," Rechvdca de th eologie anclenne e t m£cU4rale,XVII(l950) ,46-60l-------- 192 Robson ,C. A ., "The Pec la of the Twelfth-Century Paris School," Dominican Stu dies, II (1949),267-279. R ossi," II Mlcrocosmua di Goffredo di San V ittore," Divus Thomas (Piacenza),LV (1952),238-244. Rouse,R.H.,"Bostonus fiuriensis and the Author of the Cata logue Scrlptorua E cclesla e,"Speculum,XLI(1966),471-479. Rozsaly,"A Translation of De Sacramentis, "New Scholasticism XXVII(1953),335-338. Smalley, Beryl,"Andrew of Saint V ictor, Abbot of Wigmore, a Twelfth-Century H ebraist," Reeherehes de th /o lo g le anci- enne et m£didVale,X (1938),358-373. —irThe School of Andrew of Saint V ictor, "R T A M ,Xl(l939).l45-367 —The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages'TOxford, 1952). Splcq.C .tBsqmlsse d*une histoire de l*ex4g&8e latine au moyen age (P a ris,1944). Squire, Aelred,"Aelred of Rieyaulx and Hugh of S t. V ictor," Reeherehes de th eologie anclenne et m£di£v^le,XXVIII(l96l) 161— 164. S ta h l,lie ., Rom an Science (Madison,Wis.,1962) Studeny,R.F.,"W alter of Saint V ictor and the Apologia de Verbo Incarnato, " Gregorianum,XVIII(1937),579-365. Tanner,T.,B ibliotheca Britannico-H ibernica (London,1748). Taylor, Jerome,The Origin and Early L ife of Hugh of S t. Vic tor (Notre D aSSTlW rt---------------- ------------------- --------------------- —e d .,The D ldascallcon of Hugh of S t. V ictor, with tran sla tion and notes by Jerome faylor T^ew York,1961). Th/ry»G., "Les oeuvres dionysiennes de Thomas Gallus,"La v ie spi r l t u e l l e ,XXXl(l932)147-167: XXXIIl(l932),129-154:-------- — "Chronologic des oeuvres de Thomas Gallus*"Divus Thomas (Piacenza),XXXVII(1934),265-277f 365-385} 439-406; — "Thomas Gallus: apergu biographique,"Archives d’h isto ir e d octrlnale et littd fra ire du moyen 8ge,X II(1039) ,14 1-208 Trochon, C .,E ssai sur lih is t o ir e de la Bible dans la France chretienne au moyen ffge (Paris7l87S); —Andrrf de Saint-V ictor (P a r is,1877). Van den Eynde, Damien,"Deux trait4s^faussem ent a ttrib u te I Hugues de St-V ictor: De filia Iephte et Expositio in reg- 193 ulam b . A ugustini,"Franciscan Studies,XIX(1959),318-324. ~ Esaai~sur la succession et la date dea d crlts de Huguea de Saint-VTctor"(Rome ,1950). ^ ^ X es^ o tu la e Tn Genesium de Huguea de S aint-V ictor, source lit t lr a i r e de la Sum m a Sententiarum, "Antonianum.XXXV(3960) 323-327. — -"Le Liber Magiatri H ug on i a 11 1 Franc is can Studies, XXIII (l963) 268-259. Van Blswi.1k,H.C., Gilbert Porreta, aa Tie,son oeuvre, sa penabe (Louvain,1966). Van Steenberghen,P.,"L'organisation des Etudes au moyen £ge et aes repercussions aur le mouvement philosophique," Re- vue phlloaophique de Louvain,LII(1954),5 7 5 ff. V ernet,P ., "Hugues de Saint-V ictor,"D ictionnalre de th lo lo - g le cathollque.V I l(l9 2 l),251-253. V illera,M .,"Achard de Saint-V ictor, "D ictionnalre de s p ir it - u a l i t l ,I (P a ris,1937). Waddell»Helen, The Wandering Scholars (London,1932). de Warren,H.B.,"Bernard et l'ord re de Saint-Victor,"Bernard de Clalrvaux (P a r is,1953). W eisw eiler,H ., "Hugos von S t. Viktor Dialogus Be sacramentis l£S48 . »»*yralla et scriptae a ls fr& hscholasllsclies Quel- J-enwerk,"M iscellanea Giovanni M ercati,I I (C itta del V ati- cano. 1946),179-219. — Die Pseudo-Dionysiuakommentare.. .des Skfttus Eriugena und von S t. V ik to r,” Reoherchea de th eologie anclenne et mea- U v a le .XIX(1952),26-49. —*Sakrament a ls Symbol und T eilhabe. Der Einflusa dea Pseu* do-Dionyaiua auf die allgsm&ine Sakramentenlehre Hugos von S t. Viktor," Scholaatlk.XXVII (1952),321-343. Wilmart,A., "Le commentaire aur le prophfete Nahum a ttr ib u l fe Julien de Tolede," B u lletin de litte r a tu r e eccl^ sia s- tlq u e. (1922),253-2771 — "Opuscules choiai8 de Huguea de Saint-V ictor, "Revue bintf- d ic tin e .XLV (1933),242-248. 194 Reviews d 'A in v elle,V ., "Ricnard of Saint V ictor, De T rin ita te, " Las Etudes phllosophioucs.XV(1960),569*560. Antin,"Richard of Saint Vietor,Da T rin ita te," Latomua,XIX (1960),626-627, Batailion,L.,"R ichard de S t-V icto r.Liber exceptionum,"Revue dee sciences philosophiques et th6olbgiques»XL)lll(i956) 701. — "Riehard de S t-V ictor, La T rin ita te. "R8PT.X L IIl(l959),699 — "Richard de St-V ictor,L a T rrnit4. hgSPfT3EIVl( 1962) ,820. Boehner,"Hugh of St. V ictor, O n the Sacraments."Philosophy and Phenomenological ResearcE,XI 11(1052-1953) .9b2-2&3. Brady,Ignatius,"Godfrey of S t. V iotor, Pons p hilosoph ise, " Archlvum Franciscanum Hlstoricum.L(l9& 7],115-120. Butler,"Richard of S t. V ictor, Selected W ritings, " Downside Review,IXXV (1967) ,388-389. Combes,V.A.,"Richard de S t-V ictor, L *ld it d * Alexandre. "Re vue d 'h isto ire de l ^ g l l s e de Prance.)SxV Il( 1951) .90-9T. Delhaye, Philippe,"Richard de S t-V ictor, De T rin ita te." Melanges de science r e llg le u s e ,XVl(l959T784-AS. — "Richard de S t-V lcto r,fre frfn T tate,"M SR .XVIl( 1960).169. — "Richard de St-V ictor,D e T rir.lia te• "Revue d 'h isto ir e ec- cl< sla 8 tlo u e.LIV (l959)T l90-19l. Doyfere»"Hugues de St-V ictor,La Contemplation. "Revue d*his- to lre ec clea ia stlq u e,XIV(l?S9)',lo§3. Dumeige,Gervais,"Richard de St-V ictor,L *4dit d'Alexandre." Gregorianum.XXXIII(1952).187-188. — ^Richard de St-V ictor,D e Trinitate,"Gregorianum,XLI(1960) 536-537. — "Richard de St-V ictor,L a contemplations ,"Gregorianum.XLII (1961),784-785. ----------- — "Richard de S t-V ictor, Sermones e t opuscules, "Recherches de sciences r e lig ie u s e s ,XLIl(1954T,150-151. —w Bodefroy de s i- v ic io r , Pons p h ilo so p h ise."RSR«X LV ( 1957). 291-292, — "Richard de S t-V ictor, Selected W ritings. "RSR.XLVI(195S). 195 — -"Huguea de St-V ictor, La Contemplation,"RSR,XLIX(l96l), 238-240. — "Richard de St-V ictor, Liber exceptionum."RSR.XL1X( 1961)» 245-246. — "Richard de St-V ictor, la Trinitf,"RSR,XLIX(l96l) ,244-245 Felderer,"Richard Ton St-V ictor,D e T rin itate," Z eitech rift fttr kathoiiache Theologie.LXXXTTdSdoi.353- Gaine,"Hugh of S t. V ictor, Soliloquy on the Earnest M oney of the Sou^."PhiloaophicaI S tu d ies,tTIlTIifefr) .232-233. Garvin, "Richard of St. V ictor, Sermons et oouacules."Spec ulum, XXXI (1956) ,371-373. — Richard o f St. V ictor, S elected Writings,"Speculum, XXXVl(1961),169-172. de Geradon,"Richard de S t-V ictor,L '^ d it d'Alexandre."Revue b fn tfd ictin e,1X11(1952),167. Hiring,N.M .,"Defarrari*a version of De Sacramentis ."New Scholasticjam ,XXVII(1953),447-454. J a v elet,R ., "Richard de S t-V icto r, Sermones e t opuscules," Revue des scien ces r e llg ie u e e a .XXVll(1953 ) 7 7 ll- 4 l2 . — "Richard de 5 t-v ic to r . D e T r in ita te . " RevSR.XXXIIl(l959). 407-408. — "Richard de St-V ictor, Liber exceptionum."RevSR.XXXV (1961),68-69. --------- -------- — "Richard de St-V ictor, la Trinit*,"RevSR,XXXVI(1962),211. Kfinsle,S.,"Richard von S t-V ictor, De Trinitate,"Freibur«er Z e itsc h r ift fttr Philosophie und TKeologie.%(l9fl5) .161; Lee, "H ugh o f St. V ictor, O n the Sacraments, "H ew S ch o la sti cism .XXVII (1953) ,104-109. Lottin,0«,"Richard de S t-V ictor, L 'ld it d * Alexandre." Bul le tin de th*ologle ancienne et m*dl*vaie,V l (lS5l)'330-331. — "flodefroy de Si-VIclorT Fona philoaophiae. "B T A M .VII(1957) 681. — •Richard de St-V ictor, Liber exceptionum."B T A M .V III(1959) 495-496. — "Richard de St-V ictor, De T r in ita te , " B T A M .V III(1959),355. — "Hugues de St-V ictor, De contem platione.w BTAIl,V IIl(l9 5 9 ). 342. — "Richard de St-V ictor, La Trinit£,'B T ^j,V IIl(l96l) ,943. -"Hugues de St-V ictor, D idaacallcon."B T A M .IX (l9 6 2 ),100. 196 llarouseaUf "Godefroy de St-Victor* Fons philosophiae*"Revue dee Etudes 1 stin e s ,XXXIV(1956) >43*?. Baumann,"Richard von S t-V ictor, Sermons et opuscules. "Z eit- a ch rlft fur kathollsche Theologle,itXXVTT(l5fe&) ,5o4. Philips*"Richard de St-V ictor, De T r in ita te."Bphemerides Theologicae Lovanlenses.XXXV(I559),82. Roques,R.,"Richard de S t-V icto r,Liber exceptionum,"Revue de V h isto ir e des r e lig io n s , CLVIlIi960).65-9 . Smet,"Hichard de St-V ictor,D e Trinitate,"Revue philosophioue de Louvain, LVII(1959),241-24<T Van de Walle, "Richard of St .V ictor,D e Tr in i t a t e ." Coaunentarii c is te r c le n s e s .X Il(1961)95*96. Wlcksteed,"Hugh of S t, V ictor, Soliloquy on the Earnest M on - ey of the Soul, " Ctteaux in de flederlancten.tX (i958)7S -?6" Widner,"Richard de St-V ictor,L a T r in it/,"Revue de thdologle et de philosoph ic,X I(1961)77^88. Anonymous Reviews "A.D.","Godefroy de S t-V icto r,Fons p h ilosop h ise,"Revue des Etudes augustiniennes.V (1959),*301. "B.","N.M.Hiring,'The so -ca lled Apologia de Verbo Incarnato'" B u lletin thom iate.X (1957-1959),102-143. "C,D.","Richard de S t-V ictor, De T r in ita te, "Revue de l'u n l- v e r s it* d'Ottawa.XXX(i9 6 0 ),6 0 . "F.-J.T.","Beumer, 'Richard von S t, Viktor, Theologe und M ystiker,1"Revue des Etudes augustiniennes,V (l9 5 9 ),3 0 1 ff. " 0 ," ,"Beumer, 'Richard von S t. V iktor. Theologe und Itysti- k er,'" B u lletin thom iste,X (1957-1959). "O.R.","Richard de S t-V ictor, Sermons et opuscules • ” Irtfn ikon XXVIII(1955),119. "O.R.","Richard de S t-V ictor, La T rin itf," Irrfnikon.XXXIV (1961),114-115.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Alfred Of Sareshel'S Commentary On The 'Metheora' Of Aristotle. (Latin Text)
PDF
The Old French Fabliau: A Classification And Definition
PDF
Fulk Of Neuilly
PDF
The Preparation Of Teachers Of French And Spanish In Southern California Secondary Schools
PDF
The Theme Of Communication In The "Essais" Of Montaigne
PDF
The Concept Of The Ideal Prince In The Literature Of The French Enlightment (1700-1780)
PDF
Rhetoric And Fancy As A Basis For Narrative In The Novels Of Jean Giraudoux
PDF
Chaucer'S 'Tale Of Melibee': Its Tradition And Its Function In Fragment Vii Of The 'Canterbury Tales'
PDF
The Proteges Of Lancelot: A Study Of Malory'S Characterization Of Lancelot In The 'Morte Darthur'
PDF
Albert Camus And The Kingdom Of Nature
PDF
Narrative And Lyric Originality In The Old French Versions Of "La Vie De Saint Eustache"
PDF
A Descriptive Analysis Of The Gascon Dialect Spoken At Donzac (Tarn-Et-Garonne), France
PDF
Agrippa D'Aubigne'S Les 'Tragiques': The Conquest Of Profaned Time
PDF
The Patriot In Exile: A Study Of Heinrich Mann'S Political Journalistic Activity 1933-1950
PDF
Cynewulf: The Ascension Of Christ
PDF
Existentialism In The Theater Of Alfonso Sastre
PDF
Realism In Spanish Chivalresque Fiction Before 1500
PDF
Main Trends In The Contemporary Colombian Novel, 1953-1967
PDF
The Origins And Development Of The Catalan Consulados Ultramarinos From The Thirteenth To The Fifteenth Centuries
PDF
La Nature Dans Le Theatre De Francois De Curel
Asset Metadata
Creator
Wheeler, Penny Mcelroy
(author)
Core Title
The Twelfth-Century School Of St. Victor
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree Program
History
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
History, Medieval,OAI-PMH Harvest
Language
English
Contributor
Digitized by ProQuest
(provenance)
Advisor
Dales, Richard C. (
committee chair
), Berkey, Max Leslie, Jr. (
committee member
), Moote, A. Lloyd (
committee member
)
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-452683
Unique identifier
UC11362396
Identifier
7107749.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-452683 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
7107749
Dmrecord
452683
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Wheeler, Penny Mcelroy
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Access Conditions
The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...
Repository Name
University of Southern California Digital Library
Repository Location
USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA
Tags
History, Medieval