Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-j7cmm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-09T19:53:06.549Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Hereford and Lincoln Cathedral Libraries during the High Middle Ages

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  30 April 2020

MARK J. CLARK
MARK J. CLARK*
Affiliation:
School of Theology and Religious Studies, The Catholic University of America, 620 Michigan Avenue NE, Washington, DC20064, USA
*
E-mail: clarkm@cua.edu
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this study evidence is brought forth from large treasuries of scholastic manuscripts at Hereford and Lincoln that challenges R. M. Thomson's assessment of the importance of those collections during the High Middle Ages. As it turns out, as early as the twelfth century those libraries contained copies of the most important works in the developing Parisian theological curriculum, and the earliest copies of those works may reside in these and other English cathedral libraries. Manuscripts preserving early versions of the Sentences are especially interesting, since they make it possible to study the evolution of Peter Lombard's thought during his lifetime.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Ecclesiastical History , Volume 71 , Issue 3 , July 2020 , pp. 502 - 526
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2020

Scholars interested in Peter Lombard and his twelfth-century predecessors and successors teaching theology at the cathedral in Paris would be struck by the number of manuscripts in English cathedral libraries preserving their works.Footnote 1 For Peter Lombard alone, Lincoln's current collection contains five manuscripts containing the Lombard's Collectanea on the Pauline Epistles, nine manuscripts preserving copies of his commentary on the Psalms and five manuscripts preserving copies of the Sentences.Footnote 2 Hereford's current collection includes two manuscripts containing the Lombard's Collectanea, one manuscript preserving a copy of his commentary on the Psalms and seven manuscripts preserving copies, full or partial, of the Sentences.Footnote 3 Even at Worcester, a cathedral staffed not by canons but by Benedictine monks, the number of twelfth-century scholastic works from Paris is striking. As R. M. Thomson puts it: ‘Among the surviving books are eleven copies of the Sentences with glosses, and twenty of commentary.’Footnote 4 Equally impressive are the holdings of the two other English cathedral libraries that retain large manuscript collections: Durham has eight manuscripts preserving works of Peter Lombard, Salisbury three.Footnote 5

If one includes manuscripts preserving works that Peter Lombard developed (notably of Gilbert de la Porrée), and of his successors and disciples during the second half of the twelfth century (Peter Comestor, Stephen Langton, Peter the Chanter, Peter of Poitiers and others), the number of twelfth-century Parisian scholastic works in English cathedral libraries inspires wonder. If one includes the manuscripts in those same English cathedral libraries preserving copies of books or series of books from the biblical Gloss which, as Thomson notes, were mainly of scholastic origin, the number of Parisian scholastic works from the second half of the twelfth century in English cathedral libraries becomes truly remarkable.Footnote 6

As soon as one realises how many twelfth-century Parisian scholastic works are preserved in these libraries, the question arises: how did they get there? The next question is when they got there: how many twelfth-century Parisian works were in these English cathedral libraries during the twelfth century? The answer is, quite a few. A quick tour of N. R. Ker's Medieval libraries of Great Britain reveals that there were, as one would expect, many more copies of such early works that were taken elsewhere: to Cambridge, London and Oxford.Footnote 7 Yet arguably the best record of the Parisian scholastic works in these cathedral libraries are medieval catalogues, and we are fortunate to have one listing the manuscripts in Lincoln Cathedral Library before 1200.

Thomson estimates that this list, which is entered into the front of the Chapter Bible (Lincoln ms 1), was first made around 1160 and added to into the thirteenth century.Footnote 8 Canon Woolley, author of an earlier catalogue of the manuscripts of the Lincoln Cathedral Library, calls it Hamo's Catalogue, after the chancellor appointed before 20 February 1148.Footnote 9 In Woolley's view, the list was copied around 1200 from a model already in existence and added to over time. Neither scholar provides any guidance as to the basis for their estimates, but since both agree that the list is a reliable guide to the books in Lincoln Cathedral Library up to roughly 1200 this is considered as a starting point throughout this study.

Thomson's assessment of Lincoln Cathedral Library's importance is bluntly pessimistic: ‘Lincoln's was thus never a great library, either qualitatively or quantitatively.’Footnote 10 In this study, however, evidence from Hamo's Catalogue and manuscripts currently in the library calls into question Thomson's pessimistic assessment on both grounds. The evidence presented below shows that Lincoln not only had but still has an important collection of manuscripts preserving the major Parisian scholastic works of the twelfth century. This is especially true of the most famous works of Peter Lombard, since Lincoln's manuscripts preserve what may well be some of the earliest extant copies of lectures delivered by the Lombard during his Parisian teaching career.

It is not possible, however, in one short study to discuss, even cursorily, all the scholastic treasures on Hamo's list, and of necessity manuscripts, both at Hereford and Lincoln, preserving works of central importance for understanding the development of twelfth-century scholastic thought in Paris must be passed over. These include the two early copies of Gilbert de la Porrée on the Psalms and the three copies of Peter Lombard's glosses on the same in Lincoln's medieval collection,Footnote 11 Lincoln's impressive collection of Parisian scholastic works on the Pauline Epistles, medieval and modern,Footnote 12 and Hereford's as well.Footnote 13 Instead, the focus is on two works in particular that illustrate the importance of the collections of the cathedral libraries at Lincoln and Hereford: Peter Lombard's Sentences and Peter Comestor's Historia scholastica.

The Lombard on the Sentences

Three manuscripts preserving early versions of Peter Lombard's Sentences will be discussed first: Lincoln mss 31 and 230; and Hereford ms O.VIII.9. Surprisingly, these versions, like so many others at Hereford, Lincoln and Worcester, do not match up, even remotely, with the internal organisation of Ignatius Brady's edition of the Sentences.Footnote 14 English cathedral libraries, therefore, will probably have a great deal to teach us about the fortuna and development of Peter Lombard's Sentences, both in Paris and abroad.

These versions, however, and especially those preserved in Lincoln ms 31 and Hereford ms O.VIII.9, do provide clear insight into how Peter Lombard's initial lectures on the Sentences transitioned into a textbook that became the subject of other magisterial lectures. Hamo's list notes Lincoln ms 31 as item 61, yet another of the donations of Bishop Robert: ‘De dono Roberti Secundi. bone memorie episcope … Sentencie Magistri Petri Lumbardi’ (‘From the gift of Robert the second, bishop of blessed memory … the Sentences of Master Peter Lombard’). Since the bequest was made in 1166, the year of Bishop Robert's death, Lincoln ms 31 was given by Bishop Robert to Lincoln Cathedral Library no later than six years after the death of Peter Lombard himself.Footnote 15

Lincoln ms 31, therefore, is a valuable witness to an early state of the Lombard's Sentences in four books, one in circulation before or around the time of his death. One cannot know, of course, when precisely it was copied, and it is entirely possible that Bishop Robert acquired it well before the Lombard's death in 1160 or sometime later but before his own in 1166. Whenever he first acquired the manuscript, however, its inclusion in the bequest of books donated to Lincoln Cathedral upon his death in 1166 is yet another sign of Bishop Robert's interest in the teaching of Peter Lombard in Paris.

What is certain is that Lincoln ms 31 contains a version of the Sentences earlier than any of the thirteen relied upon by Brady for his edition of the Sentences, none of which were copied within the Lombard's lifetime.Footnote 16 Lincoln ms 31 thus provides scholars with the opportunity, for the first time, to understand the status textus of the Sentences around the end of Peter Lombard's Parisian teaching career. When the version in ms 31 is edited together with that in Lincoln ms 230, which preserves an earlier version of the Sentences, scholars will be able to compare at a glance what are now the two earliest known copies of that work.

But there is another reason for the unique value of ms 31, namely its importance for scholars interested in the development of the schools of Paris and the nascent university. The version of the Sentences that it contains is manifestly an early witness, perhaps the earliest surviving witness, to the transition between Peter Lombard's lectures – the copy of the Sentences preserved in Lincoln ms 230 is just as manifestly a copy of lectures delivered by Peter Lombard early in his career – and the Sentences as a textbook to be lectured upon. ms 31 is formatted like Hereford mss P.V.13 and O.VIII.9 but represents an earlier stage in the process. Like those manuscripts, it is pre-formatted to allow for rubrication; unlike those manuscripts, it has one column pre-drawn on the inner and the outer margins of each folio, as opposed to two.

The rubrics, which are sparse compared to those in other manuscripts, may well be the first ever attached to the Lombard's Sentences, the vanguard as it were of what would become over time a complicated apparatus of rubrics and notes. They are typical rubrics: sources named (Augustine, Gregory, Jerome, Chrysostom, Damascene, Origen, various popes old and new, and names of various works); summaries of contents for readers (solutions, explanations, objections, determinations, responses, questions addressed in the text, summaries of doctrinal points, etc.). Very occasionally the voice of third persons enters the rubrics, as for example at fo. 75r (‘Hic aperit ex quo sensu dicitur “operari in filio vel per filium”’ [‘He sheds light on the meaning of what is said “to work in the Son or through the Son”’]), 76v (‘His illorum prosequitur opinionem’ [‘With these words he pursues their opinion’]), or at fo. 186r (‘Exempla ponit’ [‘he gives examples’]). These are clearly not the words of Peter Lombard but rather of someone else discussing Peter Lombard's words. What is remarkable about this is the early date of the manuscript. Evidently, sometime around the time of the Lombard's death, or perhaps even before he died, others were adding not only rubrics to the Sentences but their own words about the Lombard's positions as well. The Sentences had become a public ‘book’, and Lincoln ms 31 provides a snapshot of an early, if not the earliest stage, in this process.

The version of the Sentences in Hereford ms O.VIII.9, which Thomson includes on his list of books definitely at Hereford during the twelfth century, records another stage in this process.Footnote 17 It was one of twenty volumes donated by Ralph Foliot, archdeacon of Hereford (c. 1180–98): a collection known from an inscription in nine surviving books, including ms O.VIII.9.Footnote 18 Thomson notes that ms O.VIII.9 is ‘annotated in a contemporary hand which may be Ralph's’ and that ‘similar notes, in the same hand, appear again in a manuscript without his inscription’, namely Hereford ms P.V.13.Footnote 19 Thomson believes that, if the notes in both manuscripts are Ralph's, then ms P.V.13 ‘probably belonged to him during his period of study, likely to have been at Paris’, and on this basis Thomson states his hunch that ms P.V.13 was also part of Ralph's gift to the cathedral library.Footnote 20

In terms of the interior organisation of its chapters, the early copy of the Sentences contained in Hereford ms O.VIII.9 differs markedly from the version edited by Brady. Like Lincoln ms 31, therefore, it provides another valuable witness to the state of the Lombard's text in the twelfth century, although one strongly suspects that the version of the Sentences preserved in it is later than that in Lincoln ms 31. One unique feature of Hereford ms O.VIII.9 may prove valuable for tracing the development of the Sentences over time: whoever first copied in and marked the distinctions, sometime in the thirteenth century, was using a different scheme from that used by Brady in his edition. Thus, to cite just one example amongst many, at fo. 47r, between columns a and b, someone noted the transition from distinction xii to distinction xiii in the middle of what in Brady's edition is distinction xii, cap. 4.3. This feature of Hereford ms O.VIII.9, therefore, makes it not only a valuable snapshot of the state of the Lombard's Sentences when it was first copied but also long afterwards, as the internal organisation of the Sentences gradually took shape.

Thomson's description of the manuscript and its contents takes us a long way, especially his observations that the ‘text is carefully corrected’ and that there are ‘[e]xtensive but not continuous interlinear and marginal glosses, a few (1) by the scribe, most (2) added in an early hand’.Footnote 21 He goes on to list various Parisian theologians whose views are recorded in the margins, a list that includes the Lombard's predecessors (Hugh of St Victor and others) and his students (Peter Comestor, Robert Melun and others).Footnote 22 Thomson also points out that some of the glosses are in the same hand as those in Hereford ms P.V.13, citing Joseph de Ghellinck's study of these notes, published more than a century ago.Footnote 23

There is, however, more to the story of the marginal glosses and annotations in Hereford ms O.VIII.9. The first thing to note is the presence of multiple levels of apparatus. In red ink a rubricator has indicated sources and parts of arguments, but others have gone far beyond those concise pointers.Footnote 24 The margins, side and side, and top and bottom, are filled with annotations that include multiple, discrete layers of teaching. Thus, whereas at fo. 48ra, in the left margin, someone has copied in the relevant sources used by the Lombard, namely the biblical ‘Glossa’ (never Glossa ordinaria), and a passage from Hugh of St Victor, at the bottom of fo. 48r (immediately below column a) there is another note where an expositor gives his own view: ‘Responsio’. Directly across the same folio (fo. 48r, below column b), at the bottom of column b, the same expositor in the same hand begins another gloss: ‘Solet praeter modos dictos a magistro dici’ (‘He is accustomed to speak beyond the modes spoken by the Master’). This same expositor has gone through the whole text discussing the strengths and the weaknesses of the Lombard's theological analysis. He himself is teaching, using this book. We are, therefore, far beyond the primitive state of the apparatus in Lincoln ms 31.

In fact, this is typical, for throughout ms O.VIII.9 there is a first layer of teaching, either sources used by the Lombard in the Sentences or excerpts from the teaching of Parisian magistri, both the Lombard's own students and others as well, commenting on the Lombard's views in the Sentences; and then a second layer responding to the Lombard in the Sentences, to his critics and commentators, or to both. One meaty example will serve to illustrate the various streams of teaching here while at the same time shedding light on its relevance to the ongoing evolution of the Lombard's text.

At fo. 48va, running down the entirety of the left margin, someone is teaching about what is continuous text in ms O.VIII.9 but in Brady's edition is found subdivided into various sections of book ii, distinction 13, chapter 7.Footnote 25

The Father works (accomplishes all things) through the Son, and the Father and the Son are of the same nature and work (bring to fruition) simultaneously, and thus this word ‘works’ signifies the divine essence and consignifies its effect in the creature. Or the Father works through the Son, that is, the Father begets the Son in whom He (the Father) works, that is, the Son works with the Father as creative/moving force, and thus this word ‘works’ signifies this conception (of the Son) and consignifies the effect (of the work) in the creature. The Master (Lombard) seems to want to assign these two modes (of operation), but not plainly does he do this. Instead, to the one diligently paying attention he will even be seen <to treat> only the second mode. For when the Master says, ‘This can also be explained differently,’ he gives different words, but it is not easy to establish how he arrives at a different reckoning. Likewise note that, if the usage were available, it could have been said sufficiently competently, ‘The Son works through the Father,’ and in this way authority would seem more to be attributed to the Father, than if it should be said: ‘The Father works through the Son,’ as when it is said: ‘The Lord <acted through his servant> in some lesser way that someone acted through his own lord,’ but the Master, since this usage is not available, does not admit this. P.Footnote 26

This whole abstruse philosophical and theological conversation is here set forth to show the sophistication and level of discourse in the margins of this manuscript. The layers are not easily seen, at least not by someone unaccustomed to the intricacies of scholastic discourse and debate. Three lessons can be seen here by the one who, to borrow the marginal expositor's phrase, is paying close attention.

First, even if one does not understand or is indifferent to the theological distinctions at issue, it is clear that whoever is speaking in this marginal gloss is less than satisfied with Peter Lombard's explanation of Trinitarian operations. That the marginal expositor is not adversarial but rather deferential can be seen in his phrasing: ‘The Master (Lombard) seems to want to assign these two modes (of operation), but not plainly does he do this.’ Indeed, it is hard to translate the Latin, for the word order used conveys a subtlety of deferential disposition not readily rendered in English. None the less, the expositor, who is ‘paying diligent attention’, makes his own disagreement with the Lombard clear enough: the Lombard, the ‘Master’, tried but failed to give a valid two-fold explanation. Thus, one hears the voice of someone for whom Peter Lombard is ‘the Master’ and yet who does not hesitate to criticise him rather bluntly on a central point in Christian Trinitarian theology.

Who is this person? And, just as important, where is this person? The gloss is signed ‘P’, which brings us to the second lesson. Thomson notes correctly that ‘[i]ndividual glosses are often identified with .W. (We f.37) or .P.’, and goes on to list Peter Comestor and other Parisian theologians, as if ‘W’ and ‘P’ are to be included on the list of authorities reproduced in the margins.Footnote 27 This conclusion, however, may be premature, for while Thomson may ultimately be proved right in suggesting that ‘W’ or ‘P’ are Parisian authorities, one cannot be sure until the vast amount of teaching preserved in the margins of Hereford ms O.VIII.9 is transcribed and identified, to the greatest extent possible.Footnote 28

Unravelling the layers of magisterial teaching in ms O.VIII.9 will be no easy task, even for experienced editors familiar with twelfth-century Parisian theological teaching. Just how complicated this task will be is shown by the presence of marginal glosses such as this one on the same fo. 48va and by the same anonymous expositor: ‘Therefore when I say: “The Father works through the Son”, this word “works” notes his (the Father's) authority and thus the conception (of the Son), namely his generation. In which, therefore, this (my) exposition differs from that of “P” who is writing.’Footnote 29 The anonymous expositor is here disagreeing with P, but is he disagreeing with P's own teaching or with teaching that P is merely reporting as a scribe?

Here is a lesson and a mystery worth exploring. The margins of ms O.VIII.9 are filled with glosses and teaching on the Lombard's Sentences, as Thomson notes, copied by ‘P’ (Petrus? Paulus?) and by ‘W’ (Guillelmus). The ‘W’, by the way, is written in anglicana script. Are ‘W’ and ‘P’ independent thinkers and teachers, as one might infer from the passage just quoted by our anomymous expositor? It is hard to tell. Not every marginal gloss in ms O.VIII.9 has been examined, much less transcribed, but enough are here presented to know that ‘W’ and ‘P’ are frequently addressing themselves directly to the Lombard's Sentences, yet in other cases they refer to someone else's teaching. Even in those cases, they seem to speak in the first person. A few examples, which constitute the second evidentiary bases, will suffice to make the complexity of the situation apparent.

Both scribes, interestingly enough, seem to be reporting live speech, as in the following: P, at fo. 37v, left margin: ‘Note that he (the Lombard) is speaking according to the rule of Tichonius’ (‘Nota secundum regulam Tichonii loquitur’); and W at fo. 26r, bottom: ‘He (the Lombard) objects thus: the Father and the Son are one principle’ (‘Obicitur sic: Pater et Filius sunt unum principium’). Ten folios later, here is W again, at fo. 36rb, right margin, seemingly responding in his own words not only to the Lombard but to the Lombard's interlocutor: ‘But here I demand to be answered by them why they say this certain thing’;Footnote 30 and Guillelmus at Hereford ms, fo. 36rb, right margin: ‘that is, on the spot. And he notes that the Master is speaking according to his own opinion, which anyone would grant: “once true, always true”. But we grant that God knowingly that is on the spot… His will nevertheless is eternal. G’.Footnote 31

One here recognises three voices: that of Peter Lombard, that of a second person responding to Peter Lombard, whose response is reported by ‘W’ in the third person, and finally, in first person speech in the final sentence, that of someone, perhaps W himself, responding to the respondent. Is W here speaking in his own voice? It is premature to declare one way or the other, for it is still possible that W and P are scribes who ‘report’ someone else's first person speech.

What is, however, manifest, and this is the third lesson, is that Hereford ms O.VIII.9 is filled with many layers and levels of teaching. How else to explain the many instances of direct instructions to students that one encounters in the margins, such as for example at fo. 47rb, right margin: ‘Order the text in this way’?Footnote 32 That is how any twelfth-century master instructed his students. The fact is that these ‘marginal’ masters were teaching theology in the same manner that it was taught at Paris. Like Parisian masters they knew their logic.Footnote 33 Like Parisian masters they were able to evaluate the soundness of Peter Lombard's reasoning on their own.Footnote 34 Just like Parisian masters they habitually report the views of other masters and then give their own response, frequently in the first person.Footnote 35

Is all of this teaching that of Parisian masters? Or could some of it be attributed to masters teaching at Hereford? There were magistri at Hereford, a title that according to Julia Barrow was applied to 40–50 per cent of the canons at Hereford Cathedral between 1160 and 1240, a number that she fixes at 56.Footnote 36 Barrow, however, notes that precise information for the education of cathedral canons during this entire period exists for only three men: Gerald de Barri, Walter Map and Ralph of Maidstone.Footnote 37 Her early article on William de Vere, bishop of Hereford from 1186 to 1198, may well be the most detailed study of anyone associated with education at Hereford Cathedral with the exception of the famous Parisian master, Robert de Melun.Footnote 38 He was after all bishop of Hereford from 1163 to 1167, and a possible, if not likely, line of transmission for this Parisian material to Hereford.

There is, however, no reason to speculate, since scholars will know soon enough once these volumes are edited.Footnote 39 What is certain is that Hereford ms O.VIII.9 was a book used for teaching and learning, which came early to Hereford Cathedral. Its contents, in the main columns as in the margins, suggest a long and complicated history of teaching and learning theology, at the highest levels. The presence of schedulae added to the manuscript is yet another sign of active use and service.Footnote 40 Copied initially from a Parisian model of the Sentences with marginal rubrications noting sources and divisions of argument, precisely like Lincoln ms 31 but at a more developed stage, this book was subsequently used for teaching, as can be seen from the extensive glosses and critiques of Peter Lombard reported by P, W and others. The fact that there is another layer of teaching addressing those criticisms makes the whole history of the teaching in the manuscript as fascinating as it is complicated.

The versions of the Sentences contained in Lincoln ms 31 and Hereford ms O.VIII.9 are thus valuable separately and together. The former provides more evidence of interest in the theological teaching of Peter Lombard at Lincoln. It also preserves one of the earliest versions yet discovered of the Sentences, providing a snapshot of the transition of the Sentences into a textbook. The latter provides another and later snapshot, and thus together they open a window into the development of scholastic texts in Paris during the second half of the twelfth century long closed to scholars for lack of evidence.

However, there is an earlier version of the Sentences presently housed in the Lincoln Cathedral Library. Lincoln ms 230 (B. 6.8) probably preserves the earliest version of the Sentences yet reported by any library. Since an article has recently been published establishing three salient facts about the version of the Sentences preserved in Lincoln ms 230 (first, that it is in fact an early version of the Sentences, second, that it records Peter Lombard's lectures, and third, that the Lombard's Sentences were a work in progress developed over the course of his Parisian teaching career), the discussion herein will be limited to questions of broad historical interest.Footnote 41

Thomson recognised that Lincoln ms 230 preserves a copy of the Sentences but, comparing it with the version edited by Brady, naturally supposed that it contains books ii–iv.Footnote 42 It does not. Instead, this is a copy of what may be the earliest version of the Sentences prepared by Peter Lombard for lecturing early in his career. This version had three books, not four. About this there is no room for doubt. Throughout the manuscript, the book numbers for books i, ii and iii are clearly marked on each pair of facing pages (‘L’ for ‘Liber’ on the verso and the book (Roman) number on the facing recto, i.e. i, then ii, then iii). Moreover, the Lombard's transitions between the books are also clearly marked. Thus at fo. 40r, where book ii begins, we find the heading: ‘Here begins the second book about the Incarnation of the Word’, and at 101v, where book ii ends, we find at the bottom of the folio the following transition: ‘Here begins the third book about the sacramental signs and about those things that are related and afterwards about the Resurrection.’Footnote 43 A striking informality of organisation shows that these are lectures.Footnote 44

It is impossible to say for sure when Lincoln ms 230 arrived at Lincoln. Thomson makes no mention whatsoever of an entry (item 94) in Hamo's list referring to a second copy of the Sentences given to the Lincoln Cathedral Library during the twelfth century: ‘De dono Gualteri grossi sentencie Lumbardi.’ But no reference to either Walter the Fat or Geoffrey the Fat can be found in the Lincoln Fasti volume (iii, comp. Diana Greenway). Since, however, the entry comes between books given by Richard the precentor and Alexander the archdeacon, it is possible to be a little more precise about the dates of the copy named in Hamo's list. Richard is presumably Richard de Almaria, precentor from 1158 x 1161 to 1186/7. Alexander is more likely Master Alexander, who succeeded Richard de Almaria as archdeacon of Stow ( c. 1187–98 x 1200) than Alexander of Elstow, archdeacon of Bedford (1203 x 1206 – d.1218). The volume in Hamo's list, therefore, probably came to Lincoln between the late 1180s and 1190s.Footnote 45

Was this Lincoln ms 230? It is impossible to be sure one way or the other.Footnote 46 Information sufficient to establish the provenance of Lincoln ms 230 is not yet available. Thomson dates the manuscript to the middle of the twelfth century.Footnote 47 Tessa Webber, however, is inclined to date the manuscript slightly later, to the third quarter of the twelfth century.Footnote 48 Neither estimate would rule out the possibility of Lincoln ms 230 as item 94 on Hamo's list, but without positive evidence that this particular manuscript was at Lincoln during the twelfth century no such claim can be made with certitude. So much for the manuscript itself. What about the work within?

It is a copy, a duplicate of what may have been the earliest version of the Sentences ever prepared by Peter Lombard for lectures.Footnote 49 It is certain that it is a duplicate, because whoever prepared this manuscript went to the trouble and expense of making a beautiful copy of classroom lectures that were quite obviously a work in progress. The copyist, for example, ornamented initial letters, even on schedulae, little parchment notes inserted into the text at certain points. Thus, on the front side of the schedula inserted between fo. 88v and fo. 89r (marked by someone as fo. 88a) one finds first the continuation of one of Augustine's classic discourses on the fear of the Lord, and second the Lombard's own solution to the question posed of what it meant for Jesus to have fear of the Lord, the proto-version of what would ultimately become, in the version edited by Brady, subsections 3 and 4 of chapter three of distinction 34.Footnote 50 The back side of the same schedula contains the proto-version of what would become chapter four, subsection 1.Footnote 51

There is nothing unusual in this, except for the fact that the heading (‘Plena timoris distinctio’) on the back side is in red ink, and the first letter (‘Q’) of the first word (‘Quattuor’) is written as a beautiful green capital initial with red decorations inside. This particular schedula, since it begins and ends in the middle of phrases, was likely added owing to the copyist's having missed a section, but whoever that copyist was had very clear orders to reproduce in Lincoln ms 230 either exactly what was in the Parisian model – was Peter Lombard's working copy so beautifully decorated? – or to make it beautiful. Either way, it is a very rare schedula that is so ornamented.Footnote 52

The scribe who made this copy, therefore, must have had specific instructions to replicate this text either exactly as it was or exactly as the recipient wanted it to be preserved. Yet there, for lack of evidence, the trail ends. The question of who had access to such a treasure is tantalising, as is the question of who would have been able to have such a copy made. Unfortunately, however, better and more precise information regarding the manuscript's provenance is needed to answer such questions. It is even possible that the initial copy could have been copied several times and the manuscript could have arrived at Lincoln, serendipitously to be sure, centuries later.

What is certain, however, is that Lincoln ms 230 preserves an earlier, and perhaps even the earliest, version of the Sentences composed by Peter Lombard for classroom lectures. However and whenever it arrived at Lincoln, therefore, it will make possible for the first time an accurate understanding of the Lombard's earlier teaching on the Sentences and also a precise understanding of how that text developed, both within the Lombard's lifetime and afterwards, in England and elsewhere. This in turn will make possible a much deeper understanding of the development of the teaching of the cathedral school in Paris during Peter Lombard's lifetime and even afterwards.

The question of the dating of the Versio primitiva is itself interesting.Footnote 53 Brady's guess for when the Lombard began to work on the Sentences rested on what he considered to be the one ineluctable fact that could not be denied: Peter Lombard could not have obtained Burgundio of Pisa's translation of John of Damascus before the death of Pope Eugenius iii on 8 July 1153. Brady's reason for so believing was that Burgundio's letter dedicating his translation to Pope Eugenius iii, found even in the older manuscripts, refers to Pope Eugenius as ‘of blessed memory’.Footnote 54

Like every scholar before or since, Brady concluded that John Damascene's De fide orthodoxa could not have been available in the Latin West before the end of 1153 or even the next year.Footnote 55 This line of reasoning was the basis for the dates that Brady assigned to the Lombard's trip back to Italy, sometime between September and December of 1154, when Peter Lombard is supposed to have acquired Burgundio's translation.Footnote 56 And thus Brady concluded that Peter Lombard must have begun writing the Sentences during the school year 1155–6 since, as Brady notes, books i and iii (of the final version edited by Brady) are pregnant with the De fide orthodoxa of John Damascene.Footnote 57

The Versio primitiva of the Sentences preserved in Lincoln ms 230 does not include what would later be book i. The contents, however, of its book ii (book iii in later versions) make clear that Peter Lombard had and used John Damascene's De fide orthodoxa in this, the proto-version of the Sentences. Until recently, Riccardo Saccenti believed with Brady that Burgundio of Pisa's translation of Damascene's De fide orthodoxa was not available until 1154 at the earliest.Footnote 58 Saccenti, however, changed his mind and for two reasons. First, he found another copy of Burgundio's translation in a manuscript in Pisa (Biblioteca Cathariniana, Pisa ms 2), which refers to a more ancient manuscript in Pisa, which Saccenti believes may even have been Burgundio's original.Footnote 59 Second, his study of the Dialogi of Anselm of Havelberg, who was asked by Pope Eugenius iii to write an account of his experiences at a meeting of Greek and Latin theologians, convened by the pope in Tusculum in 1146, convinced Saccenti to rethink the historical context for Burgundio's project of translating into Latin the De fide orthodoxa at the request of Pope Eugenius iii.Footnote 60 Saccenti now dates the Pisa manuscript provisionally to between 1146 and 1148.Footnote 61

While the precise dating of Burgundio's Latin translation of De fide orthodoxa remains an open and fascinating question, arguably more important is the evident fact that the references to Pope Eugenius ‘beatae memoriae’ (‘of blessed memory’) in the manuscripts preserving Burgundio's Latin translation of De fide orthodoxa were never the insuperable obstacle to dating the Lombard's Sentences to earlier in his career that Brady and other scholars following him believed. It is obvious that Burgundio could have begun and even accomplished his translation of the De fide orthodoxa long before adding the reference to Pope Eugenius ‘of blessed memory’, since he clearly worked on the translation before the pope's death in July 1153 and survived Eugenius by four decades. Indeed, the fact that the Lombard made ample use of Burgundio's translation in compiling the Versio primitiva may prove to be the most decisive evidence for dating the former.

That said, however, it is evident that internal evidence for dating the Versio primitiva would be helpful, and that must await the edition now in progress, likely to be juxtaposed with the text in Lincoln ms 31. All that can be said for sure at this point is that the Versio primitiva in Lincoln ms 230 is demonstrably earlier than that preserved in Lincoln ms 31.Footnote 62 Brady's guess, accepted and relied upon by scholars everywhere, that the Lombard could not have begun composing the Sentences before 1155–6, may ultimately be proved wrong, but the only sure way to know will be to edit and line up the various early versions of the Lombard's works.

The presence at Lincoln and Hereford of so many early copies of the Lombard's works, not only of the Sentences but also of his lectures on the Psalms and the Pauline Epistles, provides a solid basis for recognising the importance of their collections. The fact that Lincoln Cathedral Library alone now possesses two such early copies of the Sentences is a sign of the richness of the unstudied treasury of the Lombard's works in England.

Peter Comestor’s Historia scholastica

There remains to discuss one last work on Hamo's list, which thankfully is still housed in Lincoln Cathedral Library (item 40): ‘De dono Samsonis Canonici. Hystorie. M. Petri Manducatoris’ (‘From the gift of canon Samson. The Histories of Master Peter the Eater’). Thomson, who dates the manuscript to the close of the twelfth century, agrees with Woolley that Lincoln ms 80 was ‘[p]robably Cat. vet. 40, given by Canon Samson (occ. c. 1132, c. 1187 and 1189 × 1192)’.Footnote 63 Fortunately, however, it is possible to be a little more specific about the date of this copy of the History owing to internal evidence.

The epistolary prologue that begins the work starts as follows: ‘Reverendo patri et domino suo Guillelmo Dei gratia Senonensi archiepiscopo Petrus presbyter Trecensis servus Christi vitam bonam et exitum beatum’ (‘To his reverend father and lord William archbishop of Sens by the grace of God, Peter priest of Troyes and servant of Christ wishes a good life and blessed end’). One of the two earliest extant manuscripts of the History, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna, 363 (hereinafter ‘V’), which was copied between 1180 and 1183, has this same opening line. The other, BNF, Paris, ms lat. 16943 (hereinafter ‘P’), which was copied in 1183, has the following alternative version: ‘Incipit prologus epistolaris ad Guillelmum tunc Senonensem postea vero Remensem archiepiscopum Petrus servus Christi presbyter Trecensis vitam bonam et exitum beatum’ (‘Here begins the epistolary prologue to William archbishop at that time of Sens but afterwards of Reims, Peter the servant of Christ and priest of Troyes wishes a good life and blessed end’). Apart from the obvious fact that the beginning of this line in P is no longer personal but impersonal, the crucial difference lies in the fact that Archbishop William changed sees from Sens to Reims in 1176. Lincoln ms 80, therefore, preserves a version of the History that may have been copied before 1176, although this is evidently not a necessary conclusion, as V, which has this same line, was copied between 1180 and 1183.

Independent confirmation, however, of its early date comes from the presence and formatting of notes added to the History, which are demonstrably at an earlier stage in Lincoln ms 80 than in V or P. Langton lectured twice early in his career (before 1176) on versions of the History that quite clearly predated the versions contained in the earliest extant manuscripts.Footnote 64 The basis for this judgement were the notes and their place in the manuscripts, and relying on the various stages of the migration of extra-textual notes into the main text of the History, it was possible to establish Langton's use of versions of the History prior to those in V and P. It is remarkable, therefore, to discover that the version of the History contained in Lincoln ms 80, which is in all likelihood item 40 on Hamo's list, correlates much more closely to the versions of the History that Langton lectured upon in the early 1170s than either V or P, manuscripts long considered by consensus to be the earliest extant manuscripts of the History. The version of the History in Lincoln ms 80, therefore, will be invaluable to editing the version of that work lectured upon by Langton in the early 1170s.

This manuscript preserving Comestor's History, one of many at Lincoln and Hereford, is yet another sign of the richness of those collections as regards manuscripts preserving works of twelfth-century Parisian theology, some of which were present in these libraries during the twelfth century. A pronounced reverence for Parisian theology could reasonably be argued, and especially for that associated most closely with the cathedral school in Paris on the part of those, bishops included, who were at Lincoln Cathedral during the twelfth century.

The same might also be said for Hereford Cathedral, since the manuscripts already discussed are not isolated examples. Hereford ms O.II.4, for example, is a beautiful and very early copy – Thomson estimates before 1160 – of Gilbert of Poitiers's Media glosatura.Footnote 65 The anonymous scholastic summa preserved among other works in Hereford ms P.I.1 (at fos 42–58), to cite another example, contains first-person Parisian teaching of the mid-twelfth century. The lecturer, whoever it was, like Peter Lombard in the Sentences, was familiar with the theology of Hugh of St Victor, and taught his students cutting-edge theology with the same confidence.Footnote 66 Like Hugh of St Victor, this anonymous theologian was interested in exploring what he (and they) called the ‘sacraments’, which he, like they, understood to be a very broad category denoting sacred things in this world that point to God.Footnote 67 The manner in which this anonymous lecturer organised his mini-summa bespeaks a magisterial command of Parisian theology.Footnote 68 Numerous examples betray his familiarity with the theological world of the cathedral school in Paris after the mid-twelfth century.Footnote 69

There is, however, no need to multiply examples. Hereford's collection of manuscripts that pertain to scholastic theology in Paris from 1140 to 1200, like that of Lincoln, is rich by any measure. Certainly scholars interested in Peter Lombard or his predecessors and successors in the schools of Paris could view these collections, both those in the cathedral libraries during the twelfth century and those now present, as real treasures. One could hardly dream of stumbling upon better materials for studying Peter Lombard and Parisian scholastic theology than are to be found in the manuscripts of Lincoln and Hereford. It is something of a paradox that, whereas few such early copies of the teaching of the cathedral school in Paris survive in Paris itself, the richest conceivable treasury exists across the Channel, and even there not where one might expect to find it.

To say much more at this point would be premature. The evidence just presented suggests some level of commitment on the part of individuals associated with these English cathedral schools during the twelfth century to obtain what was being taught by Peter Lombard and his predecessors and successors in Paris. It also suggests that the current collections at Lincoln and Hereford are more valuable than has been suspected, especially in light of the likelihood that so many of these manuscripts will prove invaluable to knowledge not only of Peter Lombard and Peter Comestor, among others, but also of the development of the teaching done at the cathedral school in Paris. This leads to three more general observations.

First, the twelfth-century Parisian scholastic treasury in English cathedral libraries makes possible a new and deeper understanding of the development of the schools in Paris from immediately after the death of Abelard and Hugh of St Victor in 1141 up to the formal constitutional founding of the University of Paris.Footnote 70 Second, it also makes possible a reassessment of the cathedral schools of England during the twelfth century, long rumoured to have been major centres of learning but just as long dismissed as mere provincial backwaters both in their learning and in their teaching. The evidence just presented links the cathedrals at Lincoln and Hereford in some fashion to Paris.Footnote 71 And on the basis of equally remarkable collections of twelfth-century Parisian scholastic works in other twelfth-century cathedral libraries (at Durham, Salisbury and Worcester), it seems worth pursuing the question of whether there was a network of cathedrals and cathedral schools across England connected to the cathedral school in Paris, as to each other, during the twelfth century. Another obvious question worth pursuing is how much of the theological teaching found in the margins of some of these manuscripts was English? In this connection, the evidence presented in this study suggests that the last word has not yet been spoken on the longstanding debate, taken up some time ago by Richard Southern and R. M. Thomson and brought to the fore again recently by Nicholas Vincent, over the place of England vis-à-vis that of Paris in the twelfth-century renaissance.Footnote 72

Footnotes

I am grateful to the British Academy for its grant of a Visiting Fellowship, sponsored by Nicholas Vincent and the UEA, that made this research possible. I also owe a large debt of thanks to the librarians, archivists and other staff at the cathedral libraries that I visited, often for weeks at a time. Cressida Williams and Toby Huitson at Canterbury, Ellie Jones at Exeter, Rosemary Firman at Hereford, Claire Arrand, Nicholas Bennett and Julie Taylor at Lincoln and David Morrison at Worcester all went out of their way to help me. Their support and gracious assistance were invaluable. Special thanks are due to Philippa Hoskins for help in so many ways.

References

1 A recent and comprehensive treatment of English cathedrals and the secular clergy that staffed them during the century and a half following the Norman Conquest is that of Thomas, H., The secular clergy in England, 1066–1216, Oxford 2014CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Also of interest, albeit for an earlier period, is a study of one English cathedral and its intellectual community: Webber, T., Scribes and scholars at Salisbury Cathedral, c. 1075–c.1125, Oxford 1992CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Thomson, R. M., Catalogue of the manuscripts of Lincoln Cathedral Chapter Library, Woodbridge 1989, 225Google Scholar: mss 6, 17, 160, 170 and 176 for the Lombard on the Pauline Epistles; mss 18, 30, 41, 43, 139, 144, 147, 152 and 175 on the Psalms; mss 31, 39, 99, 168 and 230 on the Sentences.

3 Mynors, R. and Thomson, R. M., Catalogue of the manuscripts of Hereford Cathedral Library, Woodbridge 1993, 143Google Scholar: mss O.IV.6 and P.V.13 for the Lombard on the Pauline Epistles; mss O.IX.9, 41, 43, 139, 144, 147, 152 and 175 on the Psalms; and mss O.III.12, O.V.6 (bk iv only), O.VIII.9, P.II.2 (bk iv only), P.III.10 (bk iv only), P.III.11, and P.VI.9 on the Sentences.

4 Thomson, R. M., A descriptive catalogue of the medieval manuscripts in Worcester Cathedral Library, Cambridge 2001, p. xxviiGoogle Scholar, citing at n. 86: ‘Glossed copies of the Sentences: F. 8, 46, 53, 64, 88, 98, 134, 176. Commentaries: F. 2, 39, 43, 50, 54, 56, 60, 67, 69, 107–9, 139, 164, 167, Q. 20, 31, 35, 69, 71.’

5 For Durham these are mss A.II.9, A.II.10, A.II.19, A.III.7, B.I.1, B.I.2, B.I.3 and B.I.4; for Salisbury mss 29, 75, 86.

6 Thomson, Lincoln Cathedral Library, p. xv.

7 Ker, N. R. (ed.), Medieval libraries of Great Britain: a list of surviving books, 2nd edn, London 1964Google Scholar.

8 Thomson, Lincoln Cathedral Library, p. xiii, citing reproductions in Giraldi Cambrensis Opera vii (RS, 1877), 165–71, esp. at p. 168Google Scholar, and in Woolley, R. M., Catalogue of the manuscripts of Lincoln Cathedral Chapter Library, London 1927, list at pp. v–ixGoogle Scholar.

9 Neve, J. Le, Fasti Ecclesiae Anglicanae, 1066-1300, III: Lincoln, comp. Greenway, D. E., London 1977, 16Google Scholar. On the role of chancellors see Vincent's, N. review of Post, G., The papacy and the rise of the universities, ed. Courtenay, W. J., Leiden 2017Google Scholar, this Journal lxx (2019), 603–5.

10 Thomson, Lincoln Cathedral Library, p. xiii. Thomson here notes that ‘[i]ts significance and interest lie rather in the high proportion of books surviving from its pre-Reformation collection, and in the rich documentary evidence which enables them to be placed in their historical context’.

11 Hamo himself donated three such works (items 80–2 on Hamo's list), the first of which (‘De dono Hamonis cancelarii. Psalterium iuxta glosaturam gilleberti porrete. simul cum textu. et cum rubea coopertura’ [‘From the gift of Hamo the chancellor. A Psalter according to the gloss of Gilbert of Poitiers. with the text and covered with rubrication’]) survives in the present-day library as ms 174. Thomson dates the manuscript itself to the mid-twelth century (ibid. p. 140). On Gilbert's work on the Psalms see Diaz, T.-G., The Psalms commentary of Gilbert of Poitiers: from lectio divina to the lecture room, New York 1996CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Diaz, adding to the list of Gilbertine manuscripts compiled by Häring, N. M., ‘Handschriftliches zu den Werken Gilberts Bischof von Poitiers’, Revue d'histoire des textes viii (1979), 133–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar, dates the work (p. 31) to shortly after 1141. I also do not discuss two important bequests by Bishop Robert de Chesney (1148–66): an early copy of Gilbert's gloss on the Psalms (item 60 on Hamo's list: ‘De dono Roberti secundi. bone memorie episcope … Psalterium iuxta glosaturam Gilleberti. sine textu’ [‘From the gift of Robert the second, bishop of blessed memory … a Psalter according to the gloss of Gilbert. without the text’]), and his copy of Peter Lombard's Great Gloss on the Psalms (item 55 on Hamo's list: ‘De dono hugonis linc. episcopi … et psalterium cum magna glosatura. quod G. precentor habet’ [‘From the gift of bishop Hugh of Lincoln … and a Psalter with the Great Gloss, which G. the chorus master has’]). Making use of the Le Neve's Fasti (iii. 13–14) to identify the precentor named as ‘probably Geoffrey of Deeping, 1206–25’, Thomson believes that this may be ms 147 in the current collection: Lincoln Cathedral library, 114. Others in the bishop's circle had copies of this same work, which they also donated (item 84 on Hamo's list: ‘De dono David Archidiaconi. Psalterium tripartitum iuxta glosaturam magistri petri’ [‘From the gift of David the Archdeacon. A tripartite Psalter according to the gloss of Master Peter’]), which Thomson identifies as ms 18 in the current collection: Lincoln Cathedral library, 15. Hamo's list also includes the bequest of Robert Blund (item 90): ‘De dono Magistri Roberti Blund. Psalterium glosatum.’

12 The first such work is a copy of the biblical Gloss on the Pauline Epistles ascribed to Hamo: ‘De dono Iordani thesaurarii. Haimo super Epistulas Pauli’ (‘From the gift of Jordan the treasurer. Hamo on the Letters of Paul’). Next (item 84) is a copy of the Lombard on the Pauline Epistles, the second manuscript in a gift of three by Master Ralph the physician: ‘De dono Magistri Radulfi Medici. Epistole Pauli glosate’ (‘From the gift of Master Ralph the physician. The Letters of Paul glossed’). Next (item 91) is another gift of the Lombard by Robert Blund, who to his gift of the Lombard's gloss of the Psalms added a volume of the Lombard's gloss on the Pauline Epistles: ‘De dono Magistri Roberti Blund … et Epistole Pauli glosate’ (‘From the gift of Master Robert Blund … and the Letters of Paul glossed’). There is one more copy listed (item 95), a gift of Archdeacon Alexander, ‘De dono Alexandri Archidiaconi. Epistole Pauli glosate’ (‘From the gift of Alexander the archdeacon. The Letters of Paul glossed’), which Thomson believes may be ms 170 in the current collection: Lincoln Cathedral Library, 137. Lincoln's current collection also includes early copies of the Lombard's lectures on Paul, and the first manuscript work on these lectures since Brady's time is being done by Peter O'Hagan, who has examined the lectures on Paul in English cathedral school libraries: ‘Teaching the tradition: twelfth-century scholastic commentaries on Paul's letter to the Romans’, unpubl. PhD diss. Toronto 2017. See also his ‘Glossing the Gloss: reading Peter Lombard's Collectanea on the Pauline Epistles as a historical act’, Traditio lxxiii (2018), 83–116Google Scholar.

13 A good example is Hereford ms P.V.13, which was pre-prepared for teaching with several columns marked out on either side of the two main columns, all of which were subsequently filled with discrete layers of classroom teaching. One finds in Hereford ms P.V.13 the teaching of Peter Lombard on the Pauline Epistles, glossed and critiqued once, and then glossed and critiqued again by yet another overlay of potent and independent teaching. The obvious question is whose teaching is recorded in the pre-formatted columns found in the inner and outer margins of these manuscripts. Is all of this teaching owing to Parisian masters or could some be attributable to the many masters at Hereford? The only way to know for sure will be to transcribe and edit all such marginal material.

14 Magistri Petri Lombardi Parisiensis Episcopi sententiae in IV libris distinctae, ed. I. Brady, Grottaferrata 1971–81, prolegomena to Sentences, 2, 22*–23*. This is surprising, since Brady's was the third, and therefore one might suppose definitive, Franciscan edition within a hundred years. See Brady, I., ‘The three editions of the “Liber Sententiarum” of Master Peter Lombard (1882–1977)’, Archivum Franciscanum Historicum lxx (1977), 400–11Google Scholar.

15 According to Thomson, Lincoln ms 31 was ‘[w]ritten thoughout, including rubrication and marginal auctoritates, in the same expert English hand as ms 96’, another manuscript included in the same donation: Lincoln Cathedral library, 23.

16 Brady rejected for good reasons the longstanding notion that Troyes ms 900 was copied during Peter Lombard's lifetime, relying instead on four other manuscripts that he dated to the twelfth century. See the discussion in prolegomena to Sentence 1 (1971), 131*–136*.

17 Mynors and Thomson, Hereford Cathedral Library, p. xviii, with the list of manuscripts at n. 29. Thomson's description of the manuscript is at pp. 57–8.

18 Ibid. listing the nine at n. 33.

19 Ibid. listing the two manuscripts at n. 35.

20 Ibid.

21 Ibid. 57.

22 Ibid.

23 Ibid. noting de Ghellinck, J., ‘Les Notes marginales du “Liber Sententiarum”’, Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique xiv (1913), 511–36Google Scholar.

24 Thus Thomson, in his description of the hands, records that there are ‘[l]ong headings and marginal notes, section-nos. and authorities in red’: Mynors and Thomson, Hereford Cathedral Library, 57.

25 See Peter Lombard, II Sentences, dist. 13, cap. 7.1 through 7.5 (Brady edn [1971], 393–5). As the point to be made here is historical rather than theological, a transcription and translation of the marginal expositor's remarks is presented, together with footnotes providing the relevant (and translated) portions of the Lombard's discussion at issue.

26 ‘Pater operatur per Filium, et Pater et Filius sunt eiusdem naturae et simul operantur, et sic hoc verbum “operator” significat divinam (corr. et expunx. by the same scribe ex “divinum”) essentiam et consignificat effectum in creatura. Vel Pater operatur per Filium id est Pater generat Filium in quo operatur id est qui operatur Patre auctore, et sic hoc verbum “operatur” notionem significat et effectum in creatura consignificat. Hos duos modos videtur velle assignare Magister, sed non plane hoc facit. Immo diligenter attendenti videbitur etiam tantum modum secundum. Cum enim Magister dicit, “Potest et aliter illud exponi,” alia quidem ponit verba, sed qualiter aliam ponat summam non est facile assignare. Item nota quod si usus haberet, satis posset competenter dici, “Filius operatur per Patrem,” et sic magis videretur attribui auctoritas Patri, quam si dicatur: “Pater operatur per Filium,” ut cum dicitur: “Do<minus fecit per servum modo> aliquo minori quod fecit aliquis per dominum suum,” sed Magister, quia nec usus, hoc non admittit. P.’: Hereford ms O.VIII.9, fo. 48va, left margin; cf. ‘Hic quaeri solet quomodo accipiendum sit quod dicitur: Pater operari in Filio vel per Filium, vel in Spiritu Sancto’ (‘Here one is accustomed to ask how should be understood what is said: The Father works in the Son or through the Son, or in the Holy Spirit’): Peter Lombard, II Sentences, dist. 13, cap. 7.1 (Brady edn [1971], 393, lines 19–21); ‘Putaverunt quidam haeretici quod Pater velut auctor et artifex, Filio et Spiritu Sancto in rerum operatione quasi instrumento uteretur, ex praedictis verbis errandi occasionem sumentes. Quod velut blasphemum atque sanae doctrinae adversum abicit pia fides’ (‘Certain heretics, taking up the opportunity of erring through the aforesaid words, thought that the Father, as if the creator and artisan, made use of the Son and the Holy Spirit in the accomplishing of all things as if by an instrument. This position holy faith rejects as blasphemy and the opposite to sound doctrine’): Peter Lombard, II Sentences, dist. 13, cap. 7.2 (Brady edn [1971], 394, lines 4–7); ‘Alia praedictorum expositio. Potest et aliter illud accipi ut dicatur Pater in Filio vel per Filium operari, quia eum genuit omnium opificem; sicut dicitur per eum iudicare quia genuit iudicem’ (‘Another explanation of the aforesaid words. This can also be understood differently, such that the Father be said to work in the Son or through the Son, since the Father begat the Son as the creator of all things; just as the Father is said to judge through the Son, since he begat the Son as judge’): Peter Lombard, II Sentences, dist. 13, cap. 7.5 (Brady edn [1971], 394, lines 23–5); and ‘Contra hanc expositionem surgit haereticus. Sed dicit haereticus: Hac ratione posset dixisse Filium operari per Patrem vel in Patre, et Spiritum Sanctum cum utroque vel per utrumque, quia Filius cum Patre et Spiritus Sanctus cum utroque operatur. Responsio: Cui breviter respondetur ideo illud dictum esse, et non istud, ut in Patre monstraretur auctoritas. Non enim Pater a Filio sed Filius a Patre operatur, et Spiritus Sanctus ab utroque’ (‘Against this exposition the heretic arises. But the heretic says: By this account it could have been said that the Son works through the Father or in the Father, and the Holy Spirit with both or through both, since the Son works with the Father and the Holy Spirit with both. My response: To which it can be responded briefly that what the Church teaches was said, and not what the heretic says, that authority might be demonstrated in the Father. For it is not that the Father works from the Son but that the Son works from the Father, and the Holy Spirit from both.’): Peter Lombard, II Sentences, dist. 13, cap. 7.4 (Brady edn [1971], 394, lines 14–20).

27 Mynors and Thomson, Hereford Cathedral Library, 57.

28 Petrus or Philippus would be common twelfth-century names beginning with P, and there were canons called Peter and Philip at Hereford, such as Master Peter of Abergavenny. If so, the gloss would probably be c. 1200. Paul was very unusual as a given name for men in twelfth-century England. W. could stand for several names: Walter or for Guillelmus with a W, i.e. Willelmus.

29 ‘Ergo cum dico: “Pater operatur per Filium,” hoc verbum “operatur” notat auctoritatem et ita notionem scilicet generationem. In quo ergo differt haec expositio a scribente P.’

30 ‘Verum hic ab eis responderi deposco cur dicant rem aliquam’: Peter Lombard, I Sentences, dist. 44, cap. 1. 3 (Brady edn [1971], 304, lines 13–14).

31 ‘id est extempore. Et notat quod Magister loquitur secundum suam opinionem quam concedit quicumque: “semel est verum, semper est verum.” Nos autem concedimus quod Deus noviter id est extempore … .Voluntas tamen eius est aeterna. G’.

32 ‘Sic ordina litteram.’ So also throughout. See, for example, the following instruction found to the left of fo. 100va: ‘Haec suple’ (‘Supply these things’).

33 Thus, for example, we find at fo. 26v, left margin: ‘Haec argumentatio est minus competens: Pater essentia divina est aequalis Filio, ergo essentia divina est aequalis Filio’ (‘This argument is less competent: the Father is equal to the Son in divine essence, therefore divine essence is equal to the Son’). And again in the same place: ‘Notat magister exponit omnes huiusmodi: Pater est aequalis Filio, similiter similis Filio per abnegationem. Sicut et huiusmodi: Pater est unus; Pater et Filius sunt duae Personae’ (‘Note that the Master explains every argument of this kind: the Father is equal to the Son, likewise he is similar to the Son through negation. Just as <he explains every argument> of this kind: the Father is one; the Father and the Son are two Persons’).

34 Throughout there is an evaluation of Peter Lombard's solutions and methods, as at 56va, left margin: ‘Magister tamen in … capitulo priorem quaestionem et non posteriorem videtur absolvere’ (‘But the Master in … this chapter seems to solve the former and not the latter question’).

35 Thus at fo. 68r, at the bottom of the column: ‘Dicunt quidam quod diversa’ (‘Certain thinkers say that different’) and at fo. 68rb, right margin: ‘Respondeo’ (‘I respond’).

36 Barrow, J., ‘The canons and citizens of Hereford c. 1160 – c. 1240’, Midland History xxiv (1999), 1–23 at p. 17Google Scholar, citing at n. 35 her earlier ‘Education and the recruitment of cathedral canons in England and Germany’, Viator xx (1989), 117–38Google Scholar. See also her monograph The clergy in the medieval world: secular clerics, their families and careers in north western Europe, c. 800–c. 1200, Cambridge 2015Google Scholar.

37 Eadem, ‘The canons and citizens of Hereford’, 17. Other teachers at Hereford in the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries include Master Nicholas Divinus, Master Simon de Melun, Master Peter of Abergavenny (all three termed theologus in the cathedral obit book) and Master Albinus. For a letter to the latter from Gerald of Wales, who comments on Albinus running the Hereford schools in the early thirteenth century, see Speculum duorum, ed. Y. Lefèvre and R. B. C. Huygens, Cardiff 1974, esp. p. 157. For all of these masters see the entries in Le Neve, J., Fasti ecclesiae anglicanae, 1066-1300, VIII: Hereford, comp. Barrow, J. S., London 2002Google Scholar. See also Barrow, J., ‘From Athelstan to Aigueblanche’, in Aylmer, G. and Tiller, J. (eds), Hereford Cathedral: a history, London 2000Google Scholar.

38 Barrow, J., ‘A twelfth-century bishop and literary patron: William de Vere’, Viator xviii (1987), 175–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

39 Like the early versions of the Sentences in Lincoln mss 31 and 230, that in Hereford ms O.VIII.9 needs to be edited, and sooner rather than later, for it not only represents an early stage in the process of the transformation of the Sentences into a textbook, but its margins are unfathomably rich in details likely to be of great interest to a wide range of medievalists.

40 See, for example, the schedula inserted between folios 96v and 97r with teaching relating the Sentences to the ecclesiastical history: ‘In ecclesiastica hystoria legitur quod Alexander episcopus Alexandriae’ (‘In the ecclesiastical history we read that Alexander, bishop of Alexandria’).

41 Clark, M. J., ‘An early version of Peter Lombard's lectures on the Sentences’, Traditio lxxiv (2019), 223–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

42 Thomson, Lincoln Cathedral Library, 189.

43 ‘Incipit liber secundus de incarnatione Verbi’: Lincoln, ms 230, fo. 40r; ‘Incipit liber tertius de signis sacramentalibus et de eis quae ipsis adiacent et postremo de Resurrectione’ (‘Here begins the third book about sacramental signs and about those things that are related to them and finally about the Resurrection’): fo. 101v.

44 Thus the transition between books ii and iii continues on without interruption: ‘de statu solis et lune. Qualiter vel quales boni vel mali resurgant et qualiter post resurrectionem se habeant’ (‘ about the state of the sun and the moon. In what way and what state the good and the evil will rise again and in what state they will be after the resurrection of the dead’). The last four words (‘post resurrectionem se habeant’) continue on to fo. 102r, where book iii begins. The Lombard's combining of the incipit for book iii with the heading for the first chapter of book iii is a sign of this version's antiquity. The Lombard started this proto-version of the Sentences around what in Brady's edition is book ii distinction 11, following what is known as the treatise on the angels, which was evidently, together with the whole of the later book i, not part of the earliest version of the Sentences.

45 I am grateful to Nicholas Vincent for these last precisions.

46 Not surprisingly, Thomson can only speculate, listing a number of possible references in older catalogues for Lincoln Cathedral Library, in which one finds vague and, it must be said, inaccurate descriptions by earlier scholars, if in fact they were referring to Lincoln ms 230. Thus, ‘Perhaps Wren Cat. I. 26 (“Quaest.: Theolog.: 8vo”), and therefore acquired by Michael Honywood (otherwise one of B. 5 or B. 24); Garvey D 6. 8 (“Responsa theological”), Apthorp, p. 284 (“Responsa theologica, 8vo”); Wooley, p. 165’: Thomson, Lincoln Cathedral Library, 190. These possible matches seem to me unlikely, since none of these Latin descriptions accords even remotely with the reality of the Lombard's Sentences, even in this primitive version.

47 Thomson notes that the hand, which he describes as an ‘elegant book-hand, probably French’, still uses ‘the cedilla and ampersand’: ibid. 189.

48 I am very grateful to Tessa Webber for sharing with me her view that the hand is probably that of an English/English-trained scribe and that the manuscript dates to the third quarter of the century. She notes especially the extent to which the scribe uses a straight horizontal bar as the common mark of abbreviation, which would be very unusual in the first half of the century, and the distinctive form of circumflex in the two instances of the punctus circumflexus on fo. 4; the curving arms of the sign contrast with the more common 7-shaped form. She adds, however, that she had seen a form close to this in BL, ms Royal 13 A X.

49 The many meticulous corrections of copying mistakes show it to be a copy. The first person language used by the Lombard throughout combined with the absence of any of the usual signs of a student report warrant the conclusion that it is a copy of the Lombard's own lectures.

50 ‘sanctum tuum. Timorem desiturum dicit sic: “Timor Domini magnum presidium proficientibus ad salutem, sed pervenientibus foras mittitur. Non enim timent iam amicum, cum ad id quod repromissum est adducti fuerint.” Ex his videtur quod timor non sit in futuro, ergo nec septem dona, quod est contra beatum Ambrosium. Solutio. Ad quod dicendum est: Beda, Augustinus, et Ambrosius contraria non sensisse sed alios usus et alia officia eorum fore in futuro quam nunc sunt insinuasse. Verbi gratia. Timor filialis modo facit timere, ne offendamus et ne separemur ab eo quem diligimus. In futuro est non poterimus vel offendere vel separari. Faciet revereri quod nunc facit in angelis vel et in sanctis animabus. Quidam tamen secundum effectum tantum esse (in cod. ‘ea’) in Christo et in angelis contendunt’ (‘your holiness. He says that fear is going to cease thus: “Fear of the Lord is a great fortress for those going forth to salvation, but is lost for those coming through to the outside. For they no longer fear this friend, when they will have been led forth to that which was promised.” From these words it seems that there will be no fear in the future, therefore neither the seven gifts of the Holy Spirit, which is against blessed Ambrose. Solution. To this it must be said: Bede Augustine, and Ambrose did not hold contrary positions but implied that there will be other uses and other duties for these gifts in the future than there now are. For example. Filial fear now makes us fear, lest we offend and lest we be separated from someone whom we love. In the future it will be such that we will not be able either to offend or be separated. Rather it will cause reverence such as now happens in angels and in holy souls. Nonetheless, certain thinkers contend that this second effect will only be in Christ and the in the angels’): Lincoln, ms 230, fo. 88a; cf. the much expanded and edited version of the same text in Peter Lombard, III Sentences, dist. 34, caps 3.3 and 3.4 (Brady edn [1981], 192, lines 1–21).

51 ‘Plena timoris distinctio. Quattuor sunt timores: mundanus sive humanus, servilis initialis, castus, filialis sive amicalis. Humanus timor est ut ait Cassiodorus super Psalterium quando “timemus pericula carnis vel amittere bona mundi.” Hic timor malus est et statim deseritur cum mundo. Hunc prohibet Dominus cum dicit: “Nolite timere eos qui occidunt corpus etc.” Timor servilis est ut Augustinus: “cum propter timorem gehennae continet se”’ (‘A full distinction on fear. There are four types of fear: worldly or human, initial servile, chaste, and filial or friendly fear. Human fear is that when, as Cassiodorus says in his work on the Psalms, “we fear dangers for our person or the loss of this world's goods”. This fear is evil and is abandoned with the world. Our Lord prohibits it when he says: “Do not fear those who kill the body etc.” Servile fear occurs when, as Augustine says: “when on account of the fear of Gehenna he restrains himself”’): Lincoln ms 230, fo. 88b; cf. here as well the much expanded and refined version in Peter Lombard, III Sentences, dist. 34, cap. 4.1 (Brady edn [1981], 192, line 22–193, line 18).

52 In more than three decades of studying scholastic manuscripts from the period 1150 to 1320 I have never until now seen schedulae ornamented with beautiful initials.

53 ‘Primo, quia, abstractione facta ab omni relatione ad Lombardum, monstrari potest quod versio Burgundionis libri Damasceni De fide orthodoxa solum post mortem beati Eugenii III (8 iulii 1153) absoluta fuerit’ (‘Firstly, since, once one has taken away every possible connection to the Lombard, it can be shown that Burgundio's version of Damascene's book, On orthodox faith, was released only after the death of blessed Eugenius the Third [8 July 1153]’): Brady, prolegomena to Sentences 1, 124*.

54 ‘deest enim epistola dedicatoria, quae Burgundionis duobus operibus prioribus praefigitur, et in titulo istius novi operis, etiam in codicibus antiquioribus, Eugenius salutatur ut “beatae memoriae”’ (‘For the dedicatory epistle is lacking, which is prefixed to two prior works of Burgundio, and in the title of this new work, even in the oldest manuscripts, Eugenius is greeted as “of blessed memory”’): ibid.

55 ‘Proinde, concludere oportet quod haec versio lucem vidit solum circa finem 1153 vel anno sequenti’ (‘Accordingly, it is necessary to conclude that this version first made its appearance only around the year 1153 or during the following year’): ibid.

56 ‘Ex alia parte, non sine influxu huius facti, ut libenter concedimus, iter italicum Magistri nostri mensibus septembri-decembri an. 1154 assignatur, quando ad limina apostolica socius fuit Theobaldi Parisiensis episcopi’ (‘On the other hand, not without the influence of this fact, as we willingly concede, the journey to Italy of our Master must be assigned to the months September through December of the year 1154, when the Lombard was the learned expert of Theobald, bishop of Paris, for an apostolic visit’): ibid.

57 ‘Unde sequitur quod terminus post quem Sententiarum (vel saltem libri primi et dist. 1–22 libri tertii, ubi frequentius occurrit nomen et doctrina Damasceni) poni debet initium anni 1155’ (‘Whence it follows that the “terminus post quem” of the Sentences [or at least of the first book and distinctions 1–22 of the third book, where there occurs most frequently the name and teaching of Damascene], must be placed at the beginning of the year 1155’): ibid.

58 Riccardo Saccenti reviews at length Burgundio's intellectual biography and agrees with Brady's dates (1154/1155) for the diffusion of the De fide orthodoxa: Un nuovo lessico morale medievale: il contributo di Burgundio da Pisa, Rome 2016, 27–53Google Scholar.

59 On the basis of palaeographical data, Saccenti believes that this manuscript was copied in Pisa, probably in the thirteenth century. It was certainly used at the Dominican convent in Pisa. It preserves a version of the Latin translation of De fide orthodoxa that is closely related to Burgundio's original, since it contains the double translation of relevant key terms and passages that Saccenti has identified as the salient feature of Burgundio's method of translation. For a detailed discussion of this feature and of Burgundio's method of translation see ibid. 61–76.

60 Saccenti bases his tentative chronology for Burgundio's translation on a reconstruction of events following Pope Eugenius’ unsuccessful dialogue between Greek and Latin theologians in Tusculum in 1146. Like Burgundio, Eugenius was from Pisa and doubtless knew of Burgundio's diplomatic mission to Constantinople in 1136–7. Saccenti speculates that, following the dialogue in Tusculum, Pope Eugenius immediately asked Burgundio to translate into Latin John of Damascus' De fide orthodoxa. Noting that Burgundio was named by Pope Eugenius Iudex sacrii palatii and was thus officially part of the papal court, Saccenti assigns to Burgundio a crucial role in the relations between the papacy and Pisa and situates his work of translation during Burgundio's work on behalf of the papal court, which moved around France during the years 1147–9.

61 Saccenti now believes that Pope Eugenius iii brought that translation with him to the Council of Reims in March 1148 and that De fide orthodoxa became available in Latin sometime between 1146, at the earliest, and 1150, at the latest. If Saccenti is correct, John Damascene's De fide orthodoxa may have reached France no later than the date of the Council of Reims. It is obvious that it could have reached there earlier and was most likely in Paris as soon as it was available.

62 For the abundant evidence supporting this assertion see Clark, ‘An early version of Peter Lombard's lectures’, 223–47.

63 Thomson, Lincoln Cathedral Library, 58.

64 Clark, M. J., The making of the Historia scholastica: 1150-1200, Toronto 2015Google Scholar.

65 Mynors and Thomson, Hereford Cathedral Library, 13.

66 ‘Quae sit materia divinarum Scripturarum iam planum fecimus. Deinde quid ad reparationem hominis pertinuerit manifeste ostendimus. Postea quare Filius Dei adventum suum tam diu distulerit aperte docuimus. Restat nunc de illa materia seriatim tractare ad cuius evidentiam hanc totius mundi in duo ponamus distinctionem id est in id quod fuit ab initio mundi usque [ad Christum add. in marg., therefore a copy that is being corrected, probably at Hereford] et in id quod est a Christo usque ad finem mundi’ (‘What the matter of the sacred Scriptures is we have already made plain. Thereafter we showed manifestly what pertained to the reparation of humankind. Afterwards we taught openly why the Son of God put off so long his coming. It remains now to treat in order the evidence upon which we posit that division of the whole world into two, that is, about that which existed from the beginning of the world up to the time of Christ, and about that which has existed since the time of Christ up to the end of the world’): Hereford ms P.I.1, fo. 42ra.

67 ‘Et quia sic totum mundum in duas partes distinximus, prius de sacramentis prioris partis, deinde de reliquiis ordine tractemus. Sed quia de reparatione hominis intendimus, non autem facile animadvertitur reparatio, nisi prius sciatur qualis fuerit lapsus, ideo praemittendum est aliquid de lapsu’ (‘And since in this way we have divided the whole world into two parts, let us first treat about the sacred things of the prior part, and thereafter about everything else in order. But since we shall focus on the reparation of humankind, and since reparation is not easily taken account of, unless it first be known what sort of fall there was, therefore we must first say something about this fall’): ibid. fos 41rb–42va. This passage also shows that, like Hugh, he focused on the theological drama of mankind's fall from grace after his creation by God and the subsequent divine reparation.

68 ‘Itaque primum capitulum huius tractatus creationem mundi continebit. Sed quia nichil est cuius ortum, ratio, et legitima causa non procedat, ideo in secunda parte de primordialibus causis dicendum est. In tertia parte de sancta Trinitate scilicet de ipso Deo qui est fons et origo omnium creaturarum. In quarta parte de voluntate Dei, ubi dicemus omnia tam bona quam mala ex voluntate eius eveniant necne. Et si mala ex voluntate eius eveniunt, qualiter dicatur’ (‘And so the first chapter of this treatise will treat comprehensively the creation of the world. But since there is nothing whose origin, reason for being, and legitimate cause does not follow, therefore in the second part there must be a discussion of the primordial causes. In the third part about the holy Trinity, namely about God himself, who is the source and origin of all creatures. In the fourth part about the will of God, where we will discuss whether everything, whether good or evil, comes forth from God's will or not. And if evil things come forth from God's will, how it can be said’): ibid. fo. 42va. As Thomson notes, even though this prologue (excerpted here in part) anounces a twelve-part summa, the lecturer stops at the third part on the Trinity: Mynors and Thomson, Hereford Cathedral Library, 64.

69 Two brief examples will have to suffice here. First, his discourse (at Hereford ms P.I.1, fo. 42va) on the perfection of the number six, a topic repeated by Peter Lombard, Peter Comestor and Stephen Langton, is virtually identical to Peter Lombard's in the Versio primitiva. Second, like Peter Comestor, he prefers to speak (at fo. 43va) of the created world as a ‘machina mundi’: ‘divina operatione multiplicata tota mundi machina excreverit’ (‘after the divine working had been multiplied the whole machine of the world grew forth’).

70 Until now there has been insufficient evidence to undertake such a stratigraphic investigation. Thus in his The origins of the university: the schools of Paris and their critics, 1100-1215, Stanford 1985, Stephen Ferruolo, in what remains a standard monograph on this subject, after discussing ‘Paris and the expansion of education’ in chapter i and ‘The school of St Victor’ in chapter ii, turns to monastic and humanistic critiques of the scholastic project. He could say little about the development of the Parisian schools after 1141, for the simple fact that such evidence was not available to him for this whole period.

71 In this regard, it is worth noting that Martin Brett has recently documented Lincoln's possession of what may have been the earliest reported Gratian in England: ‘English law and centres of law studies in the later twelfth century’, in Hernaes, P. (ed.), Archbishop Eystein as legislator: the European connection, Trondheim 2011, 87–102 at p. 89Google Scholar. Brett also notes (p. 94) Robert de Chesney's sending to Hereford to correct a very early copy of Justinian, implying that by this time both Lincoln and Hereford had Gratian, citing The letters and charters of Gilbert Foliot, ed. Morey, A. and Brooke, C. N. L., Cambridge 1965, no. 317Google Scholar. I am grateful to Nicholas Vincent for calling this study to my attention.

72 Vincent, N., ‘English kingship: the view from Paris, 1066–1204’, in Van Houts, E. (ed.), Anglo-Norman Studies XL, London 2018, 1–24 at p. 3, citing, at n. 17Google Scholar, Southern, R. W., ‘The place of England in the twelfth-century Renaissance’, in his Medieval humanism and other studies, Oxford 1970, 158–80Google Scholar, first printed in History xlv (1960), 201–16, and, at n. 21, Thomson's response: ‘England and the twelfth-century Renaissance’, Past & Present no. 101 (Nov. 1983), 3–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar, repr. in Thomson, R. M., England and the twelfth-century Renaissance, Aldershot 1998, as ch. xixGoogle Scholar.