Search

jamesgray2

A discussion of interesting books from my current stock A WordPress.com site

181J Psalterium Latinum. A early fifteenth century Manuscript Psalter  surrounded on every page by an untitled 18th century English History manuscript

181J Psalterium Latinum.

A early fifteenth century Manuscript

Psalter  surrounded on every page by an untitled 18th century English History manuscript.

                                 Tours, France circa 1430                       $95,000

IMG_0733

 

page9image8285792

page10image8300272

Quarto: 19.5 X 14 cm. 171 parchment leaves plus 1 unsigned with vertical catchwords.

A fifteenth-century manuscript Psalter with an early eighteenth-century English manuscript written in the margins throughout. The English work is mainly historical with long polemical passages concerning the Church of England. The primary aim of the author, who writes with a strong Catholic bias, is to demonstrate the illegitimacy of the reformed Church. This copy has been recently rebound in appropriate style , of full calf and clasps.

IMG_0729

 

This psalter has a long English Provenance, stretching back to the first quarter of the sixteenth-century, when this Psalter was owned by Alice Lupset, the mother of the English humanist Thomas Lupset (See below for a full discussion.)

page11image8321024

The Psalter:

IMG_0741

The illuminations in this volume is exquisite, with all of the large initials done in gold and colors, with great skill. The nine large (7-line) gilt initials are all accompanied by fullIMG_0743 illuminated borders containing leaves, fruit, flowers, and vines in many shades of blue, red, green, yellow, and orange, with gilded highlights. There are several other 4-line gilt initials in the text as well as many two and one –line initial letters.

IMG_0745This manuscript prayer book contains the complete text of the Psalms of David. The first 118 Psalms. These are followed by eighteen named Psalms(Beth, Gimel, et cetera) These are followed by Psalms 119 through 150 and, finally, eight other Psalms.

 

page11image8225440

page12image8298592

This manuscripts dates to ca 1430. None of the popular saints canonized in the 1440’s and 1450’s appear either in the calendar or in the litany of saints. This manuscript contains almost exclusively the names of universally honored saints and festival occasions for the church as its “red letter days”

IMG_0730

Provenance:

1) The sixteenth century:

A sixteenth century inscription on the final leaf informing us that this book belonged to Alice Lupset (died 1543/4) wife of the goldsmith Thomas Lupset (died 1522/3) and mother of the English Humanist.

IMG_0747

The Inscription reads:

“Thes boke belongeth unto syster Lupshed sum tyme the wife of Thomas Lupshed gol smyth”

 

A second shorter inscriptionapparently in the same hand reads:

“Lent to syster Baker”

The feast days for English saints have been added to the calendar in an early sixteenth century hand (for example Cuthbert lear 2 recto) In accordance with Henry VIII’sIMG_0737Proclamation of 1534 the word “Papa” has been duly erased from all entriesin the calendar bearing the names of popes. The Addition of English names(which are written in an English cursive hand similar to the one usedfor the ownership inscriptions) and the erasure of the word “

Pope’ were quite possibly made by Alice Lupset herself.

2) Now to the seventeenth-century. There is a single signature, only partly legible, on the final leaf: “George {???}”

3) The eighteenth-century and nineteenth-century: The ownership inscription of James Leatherbarrow appears on the first leaf and reads :

 

“Jas Leatherbarrow’s book 1751 No[vember] 13”

A nineteenth-century inscription on the rear flyleaf records the names of the subsequent owners of this manuscript: “This book belonged to James Leatherbarrow in 1751. See the name on the first page_by whom it was given to his Brother John Leatherbarrow, who gave it to his Daughter Mrs. Ann Lithgow, who gave it to her edest Daughter Mrs.Gasney & from her it came into the possession of her sister Elizabeth Lithgow. February 14, 1841” In another inscription John Lithgow identifies hiself as the son of Anne Lithgow.

From John Lithgow the manuscript passed to William Ormerod (1818-1860)

IMG_0736

The English manuscript :IMG_0734

Surrounding, or rather filling the entire margins of the Psalter. The work is part religious, part history, and part chronicle. The, as of now, unidentified author’s purpose is to expose the usurpation of the Church and the throne of England by Protestants, beginning with Lord Somerset, and to demonstrate the legitimate authority of the Catholic Church by tracing the history of Christanity in England and chronicling – using lists excerpted from other sources- the succession of the kings and bishops of England. A number of printed and at least one manuscript work are quoted in full while others are digested or presented only in excerpt. The author of the manuscript then comments then comments upon these works, often at length, making the voices of our author and his sources difficult to parse.

IMG_0735

The author cites a number of late seventeenth-century works, including Burnet’s “History of the Reformation”,and Jeremy Collier’s Historical Dictionary. A reference to John Harris’ Lexicon Technicum gives a terminus post quem of 1704.

IMG_0746

 

page14image8196256

IMG_0731

page15image8240000

 

page15image8237312

Featured post

Notes, Annotations more notes translations …

IMG_0568

261J   Marcus Tullius Cicero   edited by Jacques-Louis Strébée( 1480-1550)

 M. Tullii Ciceronis ad M. Brutum oratorJacobi Lodoici Strebaei commentariis ab authore ipso recognitis illustratus.

 

Parisiis : ex officina Michaëlis. Vascosani, 1540             $4,200

Small Folio 8 X 6 1/2 inches . *6, A-08, P4, Q6  complete ([12], 224, [20]) .

Bound in modern carta rustic ,recently resewin on three leather cords It is bound in the

IMG_0570 style of mid-sixteenth century,  thinner cartonnage with turn-ins to stabilise the edges of IMG_0566the cover.  This is a very solid and stable copy , ready to be researched with, despite the water staining.

This copy has Extensive sixteenth-century MS marginal and interlineal annotations, underlinings etc., throughout; in Latin. There is inter linear notes on every section of Cicero’s text but very few notes on Strébée’s commentary. 

Of the 224 pages, about 150 have notes in a small and sometimes very faint sixteenth century hand.

On the Printed title there is quite a bit of pen-starts and doodles as well as faint ownership signatures .   ( There is a copy in the University of Manchester Library UML copy at R229539, whisk is catalogued as having extensive notes as well.)

 

 

Before the Printed text the annotator has written an “Argumentum”

IMG_0571

Quoted from Tore Janson (see below for citation)

Orator

We have now to deal with another important preface by Cicero, that to Orator. It begins thus:

IMG_0551

(Orat. 1.1) Vtrum difficilius aut maius esset negare tibi saepius idem roganti an efficere id quod rogares diu multumque, Brute, dubitaui. Nam et negare ei quem unice diligerem cuique me carissimum esse sentirem, praesertim et iusta petenti et praeclara cupienti, durum admodum mihi uidebatur, et suscipere tantam rem, quantam non modo facultate consequi difficile esset sed etiam cogitatione complecti, uix arbitrabar esse eius qui uereretur reprehensionem doctorum atque prudentium.

23 P. 196: “Ainsi donc, les trois prooemia semblent bien subordonnés à une unité supérieure, grâce à un ensemble de thèmes repris sur différents plans.”

 Again we have a personal preface with a dedication. There is also a request from the dedicatee, here of even greater importance than in the prefaces to Rhetorica ad Herennium and De Oratore. The entire preface is about Cicero’s reaction to Brutus’ request for a work on the accom­ plished orator. Cicero pretends that he has been put in a dilemma by being asked for this. For while he feels himself obliged by his friendship with Brutus to comply with his request, he also finds the task so great that he does not believe himself capable of performing it in a satis­ factory way.

Here the theme of a request is for the first time exploited in the way that later became so enormously popular. With this theme, the author can emphasize as much as he wants both the difficulty of the task and his dependence on the dedicatee. It is worth while considering Cicero’s reasons for giving this form to the preface of Orator.

IMG_0552Naturally Cicero wishes everyone to regard his subject as important. Every author does. In his case, however, there were special reasons for dwelling unusually much on the weightiness of the things he will treat. His book is a treatise on the accomplished speaker, and in it Cicero pronounces on the central problems of oratory, a sphere in which his word of course carries great weight. As has been said before, he was the uncontested master of speaking in Rome, with the most brilliant oratorical career behind him. In the year 46, when Orator was written, he was especially interested in safeguarding his position as a speaker. His political career seemed to have come to an end, and quite an inglorious end at that. In his compulsory leisure he must have felt it was by no means certain that he would be regarded by posterity as a great statesman. Consequently, he was all the more anxious to appear really great in the sphere of oratory at least. Therefore, at a time when his mode of speaking was being attacked rather sharply by the atticists Brutus and Calvus,24 he felt obliged to repel the onslaught as authorita­ tively as possible. Hence his insistance on the importance of his task:

(Orat. 1.2) Quid enim est maius quam, cum tanta sit inter oratores bonos dissimilitudo, iudicare quae sit optima species et quasi figura dicendi?

But Cicero is also considering the direct relation between himself and his work. The greater the task is made to seem, the more natural it is that Cicero should hesitate before undertaking it:

24 See for instance Clarke pp. 80ff.

 {ibid.) Quod quoniam me saepius rogas, aggrediar non tam perficiendi spe quam experiendi uoluntate.

The author is here being modest about his own capacity, yet it is hardly likely that Cicero entertained such a fear of his subject as he pretends. As Curtius has pointed out {Eur. Lit. p. 93) we have here an evident instance of affected modesty.25 This is the first time we meet with this phenomenon, to which a great deal of attention will be paid in the following.

What, then, do these statements of Cicero really amount to? First he emphasizes as strongly as possible the importance and the difficulty of his subject. Then he expresses a modest doubt as to whether he is capable of complying with the request. This doubt must not be interpreted to mean that the author is not sure of his own importance as a writer. Cicero never questions his greatness in that respect, least of all in Orator. The real import of these sentences, therefore, is approximately this: The great Cicero has set about an unusually difficult task: Behold! According to the rules of rhetoric, the reader’s attention may be excited by laying stress on the importance of the subject. So Cicero’s pretended diffidence aims in reality at pointing out to the reader how well the author has succeeded.

The two themes of the preface hitherto dealt with, elevation of the subject and doubts about the author’s ability to treat it, are intimately connected with each other. But for logical reasons they cannot form a closed unit. For if the subject is so difficult that the author does not believe that he will accomplish it, why should he grapple with it? Even if the modesty is affected and not real, it will seem ridiculous unless the author adds something to make his action seem reasonable. Consequently these two themes have to be modified by a statement to the effect that the author is compelled to write the work. This compulsion, for Cicero as for his innumerable successors, is embodied in the request from the dedicatee. The preface ends as follows:

{Orat. 1.2) Malo enim, cum studio tuo sim obsecutus, desiderari a te pruden- tiam meam quam, si id non fecerim, beneuolentiam.

This solves the dilemma we talked about in connexion with the first words of the preface. The author declares himself willing to be guided by the wish of his friend and not by his own doubts as to the possibility of performing the task.

25 Curtius* and Norden’s term is “affektierte Bescheidenheit”.

 So Cicero, like the author of Rhetorica ad Herennium, makes his friendship a reason for writing. To appreciate this theme one has to consider the importance of friendship in Roman society by this time. Over the past fifty years there has been a great deal of research into the unique social and political structure of late republican Rome. The starting point was the fundamental book by Geizer, Die Nobilität der römischen Republik (1912), especially the second part (pp.43-116), where he treated “die sozialen Voraussetzungen der Nobilitätsherr- schaft”. Later research into friendship is surveyed in a recent book by Lossman, where the friendship between Cicero and Caesar is studied in the light of research into friendship in general. Another survey, from a different point of view, is made by Neuhauser (especially pp. 9-11), who has studied the pertinent concept of patronus. Wistrand (Chapter 2) has made a most interesting exposition of the subject, unfortunately available in Swedish only. I refer to these works and their biblio­ graphies for detailed information. Here I can only give a short account of the Roman concept of friendship according to modern research.

Roman society, Gelzer says, was interwoven with manifold bilateral connexions between the citizens, “Nah- und Treuverhältnisse”. These connexions were of paramount importance in the life of society. Among other things, their number and their strength decided the success of every politician; for every Roman citizen was bound to one or more of the important men of the state. In the elections he voted for the men he was bound to, and also supported them in other ways as required. So the politician who had tied to him the greatest number of citizens had the greatest chance of being elected to the offices he wanted. The groups of interconnected persons tended to be very large, and their heads were the very great men, like Pompeius, Crassus and Caesar. The political battles of the late Republic were fought between such politicians backed by vast numbers of people connected to them by ties of friend­ ship and fidelity. Of course the great politicians might also become connected to each other by ties of the same sort, whereupon their large bands of supporters co-operated. Such an agreement, on the highest level, was the first triumvirate.

We see that theseIMG_0573IMG_0574IMG_0575IMG_0577IMG_0576IMG_0578IMG_0578 2can be established both between an inferior and a superior and between equals. In the first case the parties may be called cliens and patronus, respectively, or they case. In both cases the fundamental mechanism is the same. One of the may be styled amici, which, of course, is the normal word in the second parties receives a service or a gift from the other and thereby becomes

 bound to repay this by performing such services as may be demanded from him. The prerequisite for the origination and function of this system is that there was in society a deeply rooted conception of every man’s duty to repay the services he had received, or in other words to show his gratitude through action.

IMG_0563It is to this fundamental concept that Cicero appeals when he pro­ poses his wish to show beneuolentia26 towards Brutus as a reason for writing the book. In this way he can count on every Roman accepting that he writes in spite of his scruples, as he is fulfilling the duty of repaying a friend—an obligation for every citizen. It must be pointed out that this conception of friendship differs considerably from the usual notion of friendship as an emotional tie. The latter view was cer­ tainly familiar to the Romans, and in particular to Cicero, but it was paralleled, if not dominated by the much more concrete and to us perhaps crass idea of services obliging to services, quite regardless of personal feelings.

So Cicero appeals to one of the fundamental moral concepts of the Romans, the duty of showing gratia to and doing officia for an amicus. At the same time, however, his relationship to Brutus, his dedicatee, was in fact a friendship also in the more emotional sense. Cicero was very capable of making real friends, and his friendship with Brutus was no doubt the most profound one of his later years.27 The ties between them were such that Brutus might well have had enough influence on Cicero to induce him to write a book, especially as he was writing all the time anyhow. So there was in this case not only the general reasons for talking about a friend’s demand, but also really sincere friendship between author and dedicatee.

IMG_0559

Finally the subject matter of the book is such that it was natural that Brutus should be interested in getting Cicero to treat it. For the friends had quite different opinions about what constituted the accomplished speaker. Unlike Cicero, Brutus stood for a severe atticism, and there was a great dispute on this matter between, primarily, Brutus and Calvus on one side and Cicero on the other. Orator was a contribution to this discussion. In spite of these controversies it is mainly the friend Brutus who is addressed in the book, whereas the opponent Brutus is attacked

26 Beneuolentia was the word used by Cicero to denote the affection for an amicus. Cf. Lossman p. 102 n. 1, and p. 106.

27 On this see, apart from the extant letters, the still very readable chapter on Brutus in Boissier, Ciceron et ses amis.

 only cautiously and indirectly; for by this time Cicero had the strongest reasons, both political and emotional, for keeping Brutus as a friend.

The preface to Orator enables the author to stress how great and difficult his subject is, how he has hesitated to tackle it, and how amicably disposed and ready to render service he is. Cicero, as we have seen, had special reasons for emphasizing all this. On the other hand, practically every author presenting himself in a personal preface wishes to lay stress upon the same things. Consequently it is not astonishing that the line of thought in this preface has been repeated, with small changes, in so many later works.

Several important elements in the preface to Orator are the same as in the prefaces studied above, to Rhetorica ad Herennium and De Ora­ tore, namely the request from a dedicatee, the praise of the subject, and the emphasis on friendship with the dedicatee. In Orator, Cicero has on the whole used the same skeleton of content as in De Oratore, though with changes to suit his aims and his situation. On the one hand there is nothing about predecessors, and the value of his own work is not emphasized in the same way as before. On the other, he clearly expresses his unwillingness to treat the subject, and in this connexion mentions the dilemma in which he is put through the request. These modifications result in the preface of Orator being more logically coherent than the introductions of the earlier works. Even if this preface is adapted to the actual situation of the author, it also seems to me to have more of a fixed scheme in it than have its predecessors. 

Tore Janson  ACTAUNIVERSITATIS STOCKHOLMIENSIS  Studia Latina Stockholmiensia
XIII  LATIN PROSE PREFACES Studies in Literary Conventions By TORE JANSON  ALMQVIST &WIKSELL  STOCKHOLM GÖTEBORG UPPSALA (INAUGURALDISSERTATION  by due permission of the Faculty of Arts and Letters of the University of Stockholm to be publicly discussed in lecture room С on Friday, May 22, 1964, at 10 a.m. for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy)

 

Featured post

William of Auxerre, on Peter Lombard.

The first medieval theologian to develop a systematic treatise on free will, the virtues, and the natural law.

245J Guillermus Altissodorensis , or  William of Auxerre, c.1150-1231 (sometimes also called William of Beauvai)

Summa aurea in quattuor libros sententiarum : a subtilissimo doctore Magistro Guillermo altissiodore[n]si edita. quam nuper amendis q[uam]plurimis doctissimus sacre theologie professor magister Guillermus de quercu diligenti admodum castigatione emendauit ac tabulam huic pernecessariam edidit.

Impressa est Parisiis : Maxima Philippi Pigoucheti cura impensis vero Nicolai vaultier et Durandi gerlier alme vniuersitatis Parisiensis librariorum iuratorum,  3 Apr. 1500/01.                                $28,000

H19386-L153309897 4

Folio, 306, [20] ; A-z8, §8ç8A-M8, N10,A-B6,C8.    First edition. Large woodcut device (Davies 82) on title, Durand Gerlier’s woodcut device (Davies 119) within 4-part border at end. Gothic types, double column. Small marginal tear, old ms. marginalia.H19386-L153309911This is a wonderful copy which is well preserved. Bound in contemporary Flemish blind stamped calf over wooden boards, rebacked with old spine, endpapers renewed, manuscript author’s name on fore-edge.  Fine blind-stamped panelled calf over beveled wooden boards with pineapple stamps in lattice pattern, within a border of double eagle and round rose stamps. Clasps and catches missing the boards have metal strips .

Provenance:old ms. inscription ‘Societatis Jesu Brugensis’ on title page ; Bibliotheca Broxbourniana (1949) ; heraldic ex libris with the letters A and E of Albert Ehrman (motto: pro viribus summis contendo)  John Ehrman (1920 – 2011) received the library that his father Albert had started; he used a bookplate with the script “Bibliotheca Broxbourniana”  In addition to his historical scholarship, he worked to enhance his father’s library, and disposed of it by gift and auction sale in the late 1970s, ending with a final sale in 1978.

H19386-L153309886-1 2

FIRST EDITION of the major work by William of Auxerre. In his commentary on Peter Lombard, William treats creation, natural law, the nature of man, a tripartite God, usury, end the Last Judgment, among other topics. He applies the critical reasoning of classical philosophy to his writing, He was an Archdeacon of Beauvais before becoming a professor of theology at the university in Paris. In 1231, he was made a member of the commission (the others were Simon of Authie and Stephen of Provins, both canons of Rheims)  appointed by Gregory IX to examine Aristotle’s writings on the natural sciences and to offer amendments where religiously necessary.   And “correct” the corpus of Aristotle and his Arab commentators (which had been banned at the university of Paris since 1210) and extirpate dangerous passages.  Contrary to the papal legate Robert of Courçon and other conservatives, who in 1210 condemned Aristotle’s Physics and Metaphysics as corruptive of Christian faith, William saw no intrinsic reason to avoid the rational analysis of Christian revelation. Confident of William’s orthodoxy, Gregory urged the King to restore him to the university faculty so that he and Godfrey of Poitiers might reorganize the plan of studies. William fell ill and died before any of these projects were begun.The work of the committee was never completed.

The Summa Aurea, written between 1215 and 1220, the Summa Aurea, is divided into  four books as a  commentary on the Sentences of Peter Lombard, that was an important precursor to Aquinas.  It contains an ample disquisition on usury and the natural law basis of economic matters.  William was one of the H19386-L153309903first theologians to be influenced by Aristotle. Preceding as he did the Aristotelian revival, William was largely influenced by St. Augustine, St. Anselm of Canterbury, Richard and Hugh of Saint–Victor, and Avicenna.  He is considered the first medieval theologian to develop a systematic treatise on free will, the virtues, and the natural law. His Summa Aurea shows an intellectual awareness and insistence on the physical which had not been seen in earlier philosophers.  Both in method and in content it shows a considerable amount of originality, although, like all the Summæ of the early thirteenth century, it is influenced by the manner and method of the Lombard.  William was probably a student of the Parisian canon and humanist Richard of St. Victor  but the teacher  whom William was most profoundly influenced was Praepositinus, or Prevostin, of Cremona, Chancellor of the University of Paris from 1206 to 1209.  William was, in turn, the teacher of the Dominican, John of Treviso, one of the first theologians of the Order of Preachers. The importance of the “Summa Aurea” is enhanced by the fact that it was one of the first Summæ composed after the introduction of the metaphysical and physical treatises of Aristotle.

H19386-L153309892 2

The Summa aurea, in four books, selectively treated such theological matters as God as one nature in three persons, creation, man, Christ and the virtues, sacramental worship, and the Last Judgment.

William’s emphasis on philosophy as a tool for Christian theology is evidenced by his critique of Plato’s doctrine of a demiurge, or cosmic intelligence, and by his treatment of the theory of knowledge as a means for distinguishing between God and creation. He also analyzed certain moral questions, including the problem of human choice and the nature of virtue.

William also wrote a Summa de officiis ecclesiasticis (“Compendium of Church Services”), which treated liturgical, or common, prayer, sacramental worship, and the annual cycle of scripture readings and chants. This systematic study served as the model for the late-13th-century noted work on divine worship, Guillaume Durand’s Rationale divinorum officiorum (“An Explanation of the Divine Offices”).

É. H. Gilson, History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages (New York 1955) 656–657. J. Ribaillier, ed., Magistri Guillelmi Altissiodorensis Summa aurea, 7 vols. (Paris 1980–1987).                                                                                                                                                       P. Glorieux, Répertoire des maîtres en théologie de Paris au XIIIe siècle (Paris 1933–34);     v. 17–18 of Bibliothèque Thomiste (Le Saulchoir 1921–) 1:293–294. c. ottaviano, Guglielmo d’Auxerre                                                                                                                                               . J. VanWijnsberghe, “De biechtleer van Willem van Auxerre in het licht der vroegscholastiek,” Studia catholica 27 (1952) 289–308.                                                                  G. Bonafede, Enciclopedia filosofica, 4 v. (Venice–Rome 1957) 2:934–935.

Goff G718; BMC VIII, 122 ; Hain 8324 ; Proctor 8206 ; Polain 1787 ; IGI 4600; IBP 2614; IDL 2170; IBE 2788; IBPort 821; SI 1815

United States of America Astrik L. Gabriel, Notre Dame IN
Boston Public Library
Bryn Mawr College, Goodhart Medieval Library
New York, Columbia University, Butler Library
San Marino CA, Huntington Library
Univ. of Chicago Libraries
Univ. of Wisconsin

Open this link for a very good introduction to Guillermus

Featured post

The “Praeparitio” is a gigantic feat of erudition.

945G     Eusebius of Caesarea                  c. 260-c. 340

Eusebius Pa[m]phili de eua[n]gelica preparac[i]o[n]e ex greco in latinu[m] translatus Incipit feliciter.               

DSC_0263 2[ Cologne, Ulrich Zel, not after 1473]                          $18,000

DSC_0005 3Folio 10 ¾  x 7 ¾  inches. [a]12, [b-o]10, [p]8      One of the earliest editions most likely the Second, (editio princeps : Venice 1470)  This copy is bound in a modern binding of half  period exposed quarter sawn beech boards and bound in quarter dark goatskin and tooled in blind.

This copy contains the fifteen books of the “Praeparatio evangelica,” whose purpose is “to justify the Christian in rejecting the religion and philosphy of the Greeks in favor of that of the Hebrews, and then to justify him in not observing the Jewish manner of life […] The following summary of its contents is taken from Mr. Gifford’s introduction to his translation of the “Praeparitio:

“The first three books discuss the threefold system of Pagan Theology: Mythical, DSC_0011 2Allegorical, and Political.  The next three, IV-VI, give an account of the chief oracles, of the worship of demons, and of the various opinions of Greek Philosophers on the doctrines of Fate and Free Will.  Books VII-IX give reasons for preferring the religion of the Hebrews founded chiefly on the testimony of various authors to the excellency of their Scriptures and the truth of their history.  In Books X-XII Eusebius argues that the Greeks had borrowed from the older theology and philosphy of the Hebrews, dwelling especially on the supposed dependence of Plato upon Moses.  In the the last three books, the comparson of Moses with Plato is continued, and the mutual contradictions of other Greek Philosphers, especially the Peripatetics and Stoics, are exposed and criticized.”

The “Praeparitio” is a gigantic feat of erudition, and, according to Harnack (Chronologie, II, p. 120), was, like many of Eusebius’ other works, actually composed during the stress of the persecution.  It ranks, with the Chronicle, second only to the Church History in importance, because of its copious extracts from ancient authors, whose works have perished.” (CE)
In explaining the plan of his treatise Eusebius promises  that his purpose shall be worked out in a way of his own, differing from the methods of the many Christian authors who had preceded him. This promise is further explained   as meaning that his arguments will not depend on his own statements, but will be given in the very words of the most learned and best known advocates of the Pagan religions, that so the evidence alleged may not be suspected of being invented by himself. The cogency of |xvi this mode of argument truthfully and fairly conducted is unquestionable, but it had not in this case such entire novelty as Eusebius seems to claim for it. We shall find as we proceed that many of his arguments are the same as those of the earlier Apologists, Aristides, Justin Martyr, Tatian, Clement of Alexandria, and Origen; that he constantly borrows long passages from their writings, including the same quotations from Greek authors, reproduced word for word with due acknowledgement. Those earlier authors had in fact adopted the very same method which Eusebius announced as distinctive of his own work. The quotations thus borrowed are however few in comparison with the great multitude gathered by Eusebius himself from all parts of the Greek literature of a thousand years, from works both known and unknown of poets, historians, and philosophers.

The peculiar value of the Praeparatio resulting from this wealth of quotation is universally acknowledged. ‘This book is almost as important to us in the study of ancient Philosophy as the Chronicon is with reference to History, since in it are present specimens of the writings of almost every philosopher of any note whose works are not now extant’ (G. E. L. Cotton, Dict. Gk. and R. Biogr., ‘Eusebius,’ 116b).

‘The Preparation exhibits the same wide range of acquaintance with the classical writers of Greece which the History exhibits in the domain of Christian literature. The list of writers quoted or referred to is astonishing for its length (see Fabric. Bibl. Graec. vii. 346). Some of these are known to us, even by name, only through Eusebius, and of several others he has preserved large portions which are not otherwise extant. . . . It was chiefly the impression produced by this mass of learning which led Scaliger to describe it as “divini commentarii,” and Cave to call it “opus profecto nobilissimum” (H. L. i. p. 178)’ (Lightfoot, Smith and “Wace’s Dict. Chr. Biogr. ii. 331)

DSC_0275
It is also very interesting because of its numerous lively fragments from historians and philosophers which are nowhere else preserved, e.g. a summary of the writings of the Phoenician priest Sanchuniathon, or the account from Diodorus Siculus’ sixth book of Euhemerus’ wondrous voyage to the island of Panchaea, and writings of the neo-Platonist philosopher Atticus.

Eusebius (c. 263-339), Greek historian and exegete, Christian polemicist and scholar Biblical canon, became bishop of Cesarea in 314 and is considered as the father of Church History as his writings are very important for the first three centuries of the Christianity.

DSC_0264 3

In Book XI Eusebius proposes to show the agreement of Plato, as the representative of Greek Philosophy, with the Hebrew Scriptures. Adopting the threefold division of Ethics, Dialectic, and Physics, he notices the moral teaching of the sacred writers, their literary methods, accurate reasoning, and correct use of significant names, their knowledge of the natural world, and their contemplation of the ‘true being’ of things unseen (chapters 1-9). He then quotes the comments of Numenius, and his saying, What else is Plato than Moses speaking Attic Greek?, and Plutarch’s treatise on the Ei0 at Delphi (10, 11).

Other points of comparison are the ineffable nature of God, His unity, the Second Cause as contemplated by Philo, Plotinus, Numenius, and Amelius, the Third Divine Power of the Ps.-Platonic Epinomis (chapters 12-30).

The nature of the Good and of the Ideas, as stated by Plato in the Republic and Timaeus, is illustrated by xxiii quotations from Numenius, Philo, and Clement of Alexandria (21-25). The existence of evil powers, the immortality of the soul and the Divine image, as taught in the Alcibiades and Phaedo, and illustrated from Porphyry’s answer to Boethus On the Soul, the creation of the world and of the heavenly bodies, the goodness of God’s works, their changes and dissolution, the resurrection of the dead, and the final judgement, are all brought into the comparison, and illustrated from the Timaeus, Republic, Politicus, and Phaedo, and from a fragment of Plutarch On the Soul.

In Book XII the comparison of Plato with the Hebrew Scriptures is continued on the simple instruction of children, the need of faith, the qualifications of rulers as described in the Laws, the Gorgias, and the Republic (chapters 1-9); the picture of the just man and his fate in the Republic; Paradise and the garden of Zeus, and the origin of mankind male and female, in the Symposium; the Deluge, the right foundation of law, religious training, the use of poetry, music, and wine, and the control of the passions, all illustrated from the Laws (chapters 10-28).

Other subjects brought into the comparison are the contrast of true philosophy and spurious wisdom (Theaetetus), the education of women (Republic), and passages of the Laws and Republic corresponding to the Hebrew Proverbs and laws of Moses on ‘the memory of the just,’ riches and poverty, and the honour due to parents, on slaves, landmarks, and thieves (chapters 29-42). Other coincidences are found in the use of certain examples and figures of speech, in the division of a nation into twelve tribes, in the situation of the chief city, and in Plato’s thoughts on faults in education (Republic), on atheism, on God, and Divine providence (Laws).

In Book XIII Eusebius quotes with approval Plato’s opinions on the absurdities of Greek mythology in the Timaeus, Republic, and Eutliyphron (chapters 1-5), on stedfast adherence to truth even unto death in the Crito |xxivand the Apology of Socrates (chapters 6-11), adding the testimonies of Aristobulus and Clement to the agreement of Plato and other Greek philosophers with the Hebrew Scriptures (chapters 12, 13).

The remainder of the book treats of matters in which Plato’s teaching is condemned concerning the belief of the common people (Timaeus and Republic), a multitude of inferior gods and daemons, the nature of the soul (Timaeus) criticized by the Platonist Severus, the worship of the heavenly bodies (Laws and Timaeus), the treatment of women (Laws and Republic), unnatural vice, and the laws of murder.

In Book XIV the consistent truth of Hebrew doctrines adopted by Christians is contrasted with the contradictions and conflicts of Greek philosophers, showing how Plato criticized his predecessors in the Theaetetus and Sophista, and was himself criticized by his followers in the successive Academies, who in their turn are subjected to the keen satire of Numenius (chapters 1-9). The subject is continued in quotations from Porphyry, Xeno-phon, Plato, Plutarch, and especially from Aristocles On Philosophy against the schools of Parmenides who rejected the evidence of the senses, of Aristippus, Metrodorus, and Protagoras who believed them alone, and of the Pyr-rhonists who believed nothing at all. The doctrines of Epicurus are refuted from the writings of Aristocles, Plato, and Dionysius of Alexandria (chapters 21-47).

In Book XV the moral character of Aristotle is defended against the slanders of Epicurus and others by Aristocles; but where he differed from Plato and the Hebrews in regard to virtue and happiness, the ideas of God and His providence, the creation of the world, the fifth corporeal essence, the nature of the heavenly bodies, and the immortality of the soul, his doctrines are severely criticized by Atticus the Platonist (chapters 2-9).

His description of the soul as an enteleceia is further criticized by Plotinus, Porphyry, and Atticus (10-13); |xxv the Stoic philosophy is discussed by Aristocles, Areius Didymus, Porphyry, Longinus, and Plotinus (14-22), and the remainder of the book is occupied with a long extract from Plutarch, De placitis Philosophorum, on the various physical theories of the world, followed by the judgement of Socrates on such questions from the Memorabilia of Xenophon.

The literary value of the Preparation for the Gospel will be most fully appreciated by considering a separate list of the chief fragments of ancient authors for the preservation of which we are indebted to Eusebius in that work.

(a) Fragments of Poetry.

1. An interesting epigram by Callimachus on the simplicity of the primitive statues (99 b): this is contained in a fragment of Plutarch, De Daedalis Plataeensibus.

2. A fragment of Euripides, Melanippe Captiva, on the characters of bad and good women (466 d).

3. Large extracts in iambic verse from the Exodus, a tragedy by the Jewish dramatist Ezekiel (438 c 10-446 d 2), on which see Schürer, Jewish People, ii. 3. 224.

4. Fragments of an epic poem On Jerusalem by a Jew named Philo, 421 c, d, 430 c, 453 a. Cf. Schürer, ibid. 222.

5. Eight extracts from the epic poem of Theodotus On the Jews, describing Sichem, and narrating the story of the sons of Emmor (426 b-429 a). Cf. Schürer, ibid. 224. |xxvi

6. Many of the oracles quoted by Oenomaus in The Detection of Impostors (209 c-234 a).

7. All the oracles contained in the work of Porphyry On the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles (123 d-124 b, 145 a-146 b, 168 b, 175 c). These oracles with their contexts are carefully edited by Wolff in his work Porph. De Philos. ex Oraculis haurienda, of which they form the chief substance.

8. Pindar, Fr. Incert. 2 (105), Paean. 10 (33), both in 687 b.

9. The remarkable epigram on the Tetragrammaton and the Name of seven vowels (520 a).

To go no farther, the Greeks would be unable to state the etymologies even of the letters of the alphabet, nor could Plato himself tell the meaning or the reason of the vowels or the consonants.
But the Hebrews would tell us the reason of ‘Alpha,’ which with them is called ‘Al’ph,’ and this signifies ‘learning’:and of ‘Beta,’ which it is their custom to call ‘Beth,’ which name they give to a house; so as to show the meaning, ‘learning of a house,’ or as it might be more plainly expressed, ‘a kind of teaching and learning of household economy.’
‘Gamma’ also is with them called ‘Gimel’: and this is their name for ‘fullness.’ Then since they call tablets ‘Delth,’ they gave this name to the fourth letter, signifying therewith by the two letters, that ‘written learning is a filling of the tablets.’
And any one going over the remaining letters of the alphabet, would find that they have been named among the Hebrews each with some cause and reason. For they say also that the combination of the seven vowels contains the enunciation of one forbidden name, which the Hebrews indicate by four letters and apply to the supreme power of God, having received the tradition from father to son that this is something unutterable and forbidden to the multitude.
And one of the wise Greeks having learned this, I know not whence, hinted it obscurely in verse, saying as follows:

‘Seven vowels tell My Name,—-the Mighty God,
The everlasting Father of mankind:
The immortal lyre am I, that guides the world,
And leads the music of the circling spheres.’  28

You would find also the meanings of the remaining Hebrew letters, by fixing your attention on each; but this we have already established by our former statements, when we were showing that the Greeks have received help in everything from the Barbarians.
And any one diligently studying the Hebrew language would discover great correctness of names current among that people: since the very name which is the appellation of the whole race has been derived from Heber; and this means the man that ‘passes over,’ since both a passage and the one who passes over are called in the Hebrew language ‘Heber.’ 29
For the term teaches us to cross over and pass from the things in this world to things divine, and by no means to stay lingering over the sight of the things that are seen, but to pass from these to the unseen and invisible things of divine knowledge concerning the Maker and Artificer of the world. Thus the first people who were devoted to the one All-ruler and Cause of the Universe, and adhered to Him with a pure and true worship, they called Hebrews, naming men of this character as travellers who had in mind passed over from earthly things.
But why should I spend more time in collecting all the instances of the propriety and correctness of the Hebrew names, when the subject requires a special treatise of its own. However, speaking generally, I think that even by what has been said I have supplied the evidence of the art of reasoning among the Hebrews: if indeed, as Plato said, it is a task for no mean or ordinary men, but for a wise lawgiver and dialectician, to discover the kind of names naturally belonging to things,—-a man such as Moses who has made known to us the Hebrew oracles. So then what follows next after the subject of Dialectics, but to examine what was the condition of the Hebrew people in regard to Physics?

10. Part of the Orphic Hymn to Zeus, of which vv. 19-42 (except two or three) are found first in the fragment of Porphyry Peri Agalmatwn preserved by Eusebius P. E. 100 c 5-101 c 1.

(b) Historical Fragments.

1. In history we have first the long extract from the translation by Philo Byblius of Sanchuniathon’s Phoenician History contained in a fragment of Porphyry’s work Against the Christians preserved by Eusebius (31 a-42 b). If we could fully trust Porphyry’s testimony to the truthfulness of Philo, and to the genuineness and antiquity of the work of Sanchuniathon, the historical value of the extract could hardly be over-estimated: and we cannot wonder that the question of its authenticity has been a most fruitful source of criticism and controversy from the time of Scaliger and Grotius to our own days. ‘Few problems, in fact, in the circle of Semitic studies and of ancient history in general are of more importance than this.’ So writes M. Renan. Memoire sur l’Origine et le Caractere veritable de l’Histoire phenicienne qui porte le nom de Sanchoniathon, p. 6.

2. Diodorus Siculus. In 59 c 2-61 a we have an interesting fragment of the sixth book of the Bibliotheca, confirming his account of the sources of Greek theology from the Ιερα αναγραφη, or Sacred Record of Euemerus,|xxvii and adding the wonderful narrative of Euemerus concerning his voyage to the fabulous island of Panchaea in the Indian Ocean.

3. The large fragments of Philo Judaeus first known from Eusebius will be found in 322 d 11 on the Word or Second God, in 336 b Concerning Providence, in 355 c-361 b on the Exodus and the Law from a work otherwise unknown, entitled Hypothetica, and in 379 a-400 a a very long and important passage from the Apology for the Jews.

These fragments will be found placed together at the end of the sixth volume of Richter’s edition of the Greek text of Philo.

4. Among the most important of the historical fragments preserved for us by Eusebius are the long extracts from the work of Alexander Polyhistor Concerning the Jews, which occupy the larger part of Book IX, and have been very carefully edited in a special monograph by Dr. J. Freudenthal. The value of these extracts is much increased by quotations from lost works of authors otherwise unknown, Eupolemus, Artapanus, Molon, a certain Philo, and Demetrius, who all wrote on the history of the Jews. On the importance of the fragments see Schürer, ibid. ii. 3. 197.

5. The extract from the Chronicon of Julius Africanus (487 d-491 b) was edited from Eusebius by Dr. Routh in Rell. Sacr. ii. 269-78, who enlarged the text from Georgius Syncellus and added copious notes (423-37).

6. From the lost work of Abydenus On Assyrian History we have most interesting notices of the Flood of Sisithrus, i. e. Noah (414 d), of the Tower of Babel (416 b), of Nebuchadnezzar’s madness and of his fortification of Babylon (456 d).

(g) Philosophical Fragments.

It is in the region of Greek Philosophy that the wealth of quotation is most remarkable.

1. Among the Neo-Platonists we find Atticus, whose commentary on the Timaeus is sharply criticized by |xxviii Proclus, but of whose own writings there remain only the important fragments preserved by Eusebius; the first of which describes the threefold division of Philosophy into Ethics, Physics, and Logic, and eulogizes Plato as ‘a man from nature’s mysteries new-inspired,’ and ‘in very truth sent down from the gods, in order that Philosophy might be seen in its full proportions,’ (509 b-510 a). Also in the long and important extracts contained in Book XV, chapters 4-9, 12, 13, Atticus appears as a passionate defender of Plato against Aristotle.

2. From the Epitome of Areius Didymus we have a short extract on the Platonic Ideas (545 b), and several passages on the Stoic doctrines in Book XV, chapters 15, 20.

3. Numenius the Neo-Pythagorean is known almost exclusively from the long and numerous extracts preserved by Eusebius. From the contemplation of true ‘Being’ with Plato (525 c-527 a) he passes on to the nature of ‘the First and Second God’ (537 a), and to ‘the only Good’ transcending all essence, which can be contemplated only apart from sense ‘in a certain, immense, ineffable, and absolutely Divine solitude’ (543 d). In 650 d we find him defending Plato for ‘preserving both life and truth’ by withdrawing from Athens; and in 727 b-739 he describes The revolt of the Academics against Plato, under the leaders of the three, or more, Academies.

4. The fragments of Aristocles the Peripatetic contain an interesting criticism of Socrates and Plato, and of the divergent Socratic Schools (510 b-511 c), a defence of the veracity of the senses against the Eleatics Xenophanes and Parmenides (756 b-757 d), a long refutation of the Sceptics Pyrrho and Timon (758 c-763 d), strong and able censures of the Sophists, Cyrenaics, and Epicureans (764 c-768 d), and lastly a defence of the moral character of Aristotle against the slanderous |xxix  attacks of Epicurus, Timaeus of Tauromenium, Alexinus the Eristic, Eubulides, Demochares, Cephisodorus, and Lycon (791 a-793 c).

5. Of the three known fragments of Euemerus, the most important is contained in a fragment of the sixth book of Diodorus Siculus, itself preserved by Eusebius (Diod. Sic. iv. 179, Dindorf).

6. On the falsehood of oracles we have first a valuable fragment of Diogenianus directed against the fatalism of Chrysippus (136 d 3); then the vigorous and amusing invective of Oenomaus occupying no less than eighteen chapters of Book V (209 b-234 c); and the long series of extracts from the work of Porphyry On the Philosophy to be derived from Oracles, mentioned above (p. xxvi).

7. Of other works of Porphyry Eusebius has preserved many fragments of the Epistle to Anebo (92 a, 197 c, 740 d), on which see Parthey’s edition of Iamblichus De Mysteriis; a large part of the treatise De Statuis (97 d 2 note); several fragments of a work On the Soul, against Boethus; three long extracts from the Philological Lecture; fragments of the famous treatise Against the Christians (31 a, 179 d, 485 b).

8. A fragment attributed to Plotinus on the Entelecheia of Aristotle, which is inserted by Creuzer after Ennead. iv. 2.

9. From Plutarch’s treatise on the Daedala, or primitive wooden statues at Plataeae, and the worship connected with them Eusebius has preserved two very interesting fragments (83 c, 99 b); and though the long extracts from the Stromateis (22 b-25 b) and the De placitis Philosophorum (836 a-852 c) are not the work of Plutarch, but a compilation by some unknown writer from the Epitome of Aetius, this very ancient error in the title does not detract from their value. We are equally indebted for their preservation to Eusebius, to whose accuracy and fidelity Diels (Proleg. 5-10) pays an emphatic and even enthusiastic testimony. |xxx

 

Goff E119; BMC I 194

(United States of America: Boston Public Library
Indiana Univ., The Lilly Library (- 2 ff.)
YUL)
;

 

CHAPTER XIV

[PLUTARCH] ‘THALES of Miletus, one of the seven sages, declared water to be the first principle of all things. This man is thought to have been the founder of philosophy, and from him the Ionic sect derived its name; for it had many successions. After studying philosophy in Egypt he came as an elderly man to Miletus. He says that all things come from water, and are all resolved into water. And he forms his conjecture first from the fact that seed, which is watery, is the first principle of all animal life; thus it is probable that all things have their origin from moisture. His second argument is that all plants derive nourishment and fruitfulness from moisture, and when deprived of it wither away. And the third, that the very fire of the sun, and of the stars, and the world itself are nourished by the evaporations of the waters. For this reason Homer also suggests this notion concerning water,

“Ocean, which is the origin of all.” 34

This is what Thales says.

‘But Anaximander of Miletus says that the first principle of all things is the infinite, for from this all are produced, and into this all pass away; for which reason also infinite worlds are generated, and pass away again into that from which they spring. So he says the reason why the infinite exists is that the subsisting creation may not be deficient in any point. But he also is at fault in not saying what the infinite is, whether it is air, or water, or earth, or any other corporeal elements; he is wrong therefore in declaring the matter while excluding the efficient cause. For the infinite is nothing else than matter, and matter cannot have an actual existence, unless the efficient cause underlie it.

‘Anaximenes of Miletus declared that the air is the first principle of all things, for from this all are produced, and into it they are resolved again. For example, our soul, he says, is air, for it holds us together; and the whole world too is encompassed by air and breath, and air and breath are used as synonyms. But he too is wrong in thinking that living beings consist of simple homogeneous air and breath; for it is impossible that the matter can exist as sole principle of things, but we must assume the efficient cause also. As for instance silver suffices not for the production of the drinking-cup, unless there be the efficient cause, that is the silversmith; the case is similar with copper and various kinds of wood, and all other matter.

‘Heracleitus and Hippasus of Metapontum say that fire is the principle of all things: for from fire, they say, all things are produced and all end in fire: and all things in the world are created as it gradually cools down. For first the coarsest part of it is pressed together and becomes earth; then the earth being resolved by the natural force of the fire is turned into water, and being vaporised becomes air. And again the world and all the bodies in it are consumed in a conflagration by fire. Fire therefore is the first principle, because all things come from it, and the end, inasmuch as they are all resolved into it.

‘Democritus, who was followed long after by Epicurus, said that the first principles of all things are bodies indivisible, but conceivable by reason, with no admixture of vacuum, uncreated, imperishable, not capable of being broken, nor of receiving shape from their parts, nor of being altered in quality, but perceptible by reason only; that they move, however, in the vacuum, and through the vacuum, and that both the vacuum itself is infinite and the bodies infinite. And the bodies possess these three properties, shape, magnitude, and weight. Democritus, however, said two, magnitude and shape; but Epicurus added to them a third, namely weight. For he said the bodies must be moved by the impulse of the weight, since otherwise they will not be moved at all. The shapes of the atoms are limitable, not infinite: for there are none either hook-shaped, nor trident-shaped, nor ring-shaped. For these shapes are easily broken, whereas the atoms are impassive and cannot be broken; but they have their proper shapes, which are conceivable by reason. And the “atom” is so called, not because it is extremely small, but because it cannot be divided, being impassive, and free from admixture of vacuum: so that if a man says “atom” he means unbreakable, impassive, unmixed with vacuum. And that the atom exists is manifest: for there are also elements (στοιχεῖα), and living beings that are empty, and there is the Monad.

‘Empedocles, son of Meton, of Agrigentum, says that there are four elements, fire, air, water, earth, and, two original forces, love and hate, of which the one tends to unite, and the other to separate. And this is how he speaks:

“Learn first four roots of all things that exist:
Bright Zeus, life-giving Hera, and the god
Of realms unseen, and Nestis, who with tears
Bedews the fountain-head of mortal life.”  35

For by “Zeus” he means the seething heat and the ether; and by “life-giving Hera,” the air; the earth by Aidoneus, and by Nestis and “the fountain-head of mortal life,” the seed, as it were, and the water.’

So great is the dissonance of the first physical philosophers: such too is their opinion concerning first principles, assuming, as they did, no god, no maker, no artificer, nor any cause of the universe, nor yet gods, nor incorporeal powers, no intelligent natures, no rational essences, nor anything at all beyond the reach of the senses, in their first principles.

In fact Anaxagoras alone is mentioned as the first of the Greeks who declared in his discourses about first principles that mind is the cause of all things. They say at least that this philosopher had a great admiration for natural science beyond all who were before him: for the sake of it certainly he left his own district a mere sheepwalk, and was the first of the Greeks who stated clearly the doctrine of first principles. For he not only pronounced, like those before him, on the essence of all things, but also on the cause which set it in motion.

‘”For in the beginning,” he said, “all things were mingled together in confusion: but mind came in, and brought them out of confusion into order.'”

One cannot but wonder how this man, having been the first among Greeks who taught concerning God in this fashion, was thought by the Athenians to be an atheist, because he regarded not the sun but the Maker of the sun as God, and barely escaped being stoned to death.

But it is said that even he did not keep the doctrine safe and sound: for though he made mind preside over all things, he did not go on to render his physical system concerning the existing world accordant with mind and reason. …

 

Featured post

“Truth consists of an adequation between the intellect and a thing”

930G Thomas Aquinas 1225-1274. editor Theodoricus de Susteren.

Summa de veritate celeberrimi doctoris s[an]cti Thome Aquinatis. que olim … me[n]dis scatebat. Nouissime iam per … magistru[m] nostru[m] Theodericum de Susteren co[n]uentus Coloniens[is] fratru[m] predicatoru[m] regentem … laboriose reuisa … feliciter incipit.

DSC_0123

930G Thomas Aquinas 1225-1274

Summa de veritate celeberrimi doctoris s[an]cti Thome Aquinatis. que olim … me[n]dis scatebat. Nouissime iam per … magistru[m] nostru[m] Theodericum de Susteren co[n]uentus Coloniens[is] fratru[m] predicatoru[m] regentem … laboriose reuisa … feliciter incipit.

Cologne : Heinrich Quentell, 7 Mar. 1499                                        $11,500

Folio 10 1/2 X 8 inches 2°: A-Z6,Aa-Gg6; {signature Dd signed De)   Third Edition/The final 15th century edition.

Blind-tooled front and back covers (including some blind-tooled letters), full calf on DSC_0122thick boards. Clasps missing, catchplates present. Foxing throughout, with some red and green ink dots along edges. Front pastedown shows slight signs of water damage. Occasional small red stains on text block (e.g. E3v and Q5), likely from the books’ rubricator, but otherwise a clean text block. “Summa de veritate celeberrimi doctoris sancti Thome Aquinatis…”First written around 1256, Thomas Aquinas’ “Disputed Questions on Truth” defends “the view that truth consists of an adequation between the intellect and a thing… Most importantly, he develops a notion of truth of being (what might be called “ontological truth”) along with truth of the intellect (what might be called “logical truth”)” (Wippel, 295)

DSC_0126Sections include: Truth; God’s Knowledge; Ideas; The Divine Word; Providence; Predestination; The Book of Life; The Knowledge of Angels; The Communication of Angelic Knowledge; The Mind; The Teacher; Prophecy; Rapture; Faith; Higher and Lower Reason; Synderesis; Conscience; The Knowledge of the First Man in the State of Innocence; Knowledge of the Soul After Death; The Knowledge of Christ; Good; The Tendency to Good and the Will; God’s Will; Free Choice; Sensuality; The Passions of the Soul; Grace; The Justification of Sinners; and The Grace of Christ.

For each topic, Aquinas reviews the topic’s Difficulties, and then responses with ‘To the Contrary’ and ‘Reply’. Aquinas concludes each topic with an “Answers to Difficulties” section, demonstrating his typical insightful worldview and readable literary style.“Everything is a being essentially. But a creature is good not essentially but by participation. Good, therefore, really adds something to being (“Good” [U1v]

translation from   http://dhspriory.org/thomas/QDdeVer21.htm).

DSC_0125

Goff T181;(Columbia University, Union Theological Seminary;HEHL; LC ;Massachusetts Historical Society;YUL)  ;  BMC I, 289/90; Only one Copy in The British Isles (BL)

DSC_0127

Impressa Agrippine. opera atq[ue] impe[n]sis p[ro]uidi viri Henrici Quentell. ciuis eiusdem. Anno salutis humane nonagesimonono supra millesimumquadringentesimu[m] Ipso die celebritatis autoris cursu felici ad finem vsq[ue] perducta.

 

Featured post

181J Psalterium Latinum. A early fifteenth century Manuscript Psalter  surrounded on every page by an untitled 18th century English History manuscript

181J Psalterium Latinum.

A early fifteenth century Manuscript

Psalter  surrounded on every page by an untitled 18th century English History manuscript.

                                 Tours, France circa 1430                       $95,000

IMG_0733

 

page9image8285792

page10image8300272

Quarto: 19.5 X 14 cm. 171 parchment leaves plus 1 unsigned with vertical catchwords.

A fifteenth-century manuscript Psalter with an early eighteenth-century English manuscript written in the margins throughout. The English work is mainly historical with long polemical passages concerning the Church of England. The primary aim of the author, who writes with a strong Catholic bias, is to demonstrate the illegitimacy of the reformed Church. This copy has been recently rebound in appropriate style , of full calf and clasps.

IMG_0729

This psalter has a long English Provenance, stretching back to the first quarter of the sixteenth-century, when this Psalter was owned by Alice Lupset, the mother of the English humanist Thomas Lupset (See below for a full discussion.)

page11image8321024

The Psalter:

IMG_0741

The illuminations in this volume is exquisite, with all of the large initials done in gold and colors, with great skill. The nine large (7-line) gilt initials are all accompanied by fullIMG_0743 illuminated borders containing leaves, fruit, flowers, and vines in many shades of blue, red, green, yellow, and orange, with gilded highlights. There are several other 4-line gilt initials in the text as well as many two and one –line initial letters.

IMG_0745This manuscript prayer book contains the complete text of the Psalms of David. The first 118 Psalms. These are followed by eighteen named Psalms(Beth, Gimel, et cetera) These are followed by Psalms 119 through 150 and, finally, eight other Psalms.

 

page11image8225440

page12image8298592

This manuscripts dates to ca 1430. None of the popular saints canonized in the 1440’s and 1450’s appear either in the calendar or in the litany of saints. This manuscript contains almost exclusively the names of universally honored saints and festival occasions for the church as its “red letter days”

IMG_0730

Provenance:

1) The sixteenth century:

A sixteenth century inscription on the final leaf informing us that this book belonged to Alice Lupset (died 1543/4) wife of the goldsmith Thomas Lupset (died 1522/3) and mother of the English Humanist.

IMG_0747

The Inscription reads:

“Thes boke belongeth unto syster Lupshed sum tyme the wife of Thomas Lupshed gol smyth”

 

A second shorter inscriptionapparently in the same hand reads:

“Lent to syster Baker”

The feast days for English saints have been added to the calendar in an early sixteenth century hand (for example Cuthbert lear 2 recto) In accordance with Henry VIII’sIMG_0737Proclamation of 1534 the word “Papa” has been duly erased from all entriesin the calendar bearing the names of popes. The Addition of English names(which are written in an English cursive hand similar to the one usedfor the ownership inscriptions) and the erasure of the word “

Pope’ were quite possibly made by Alice Lupset herself.

2) Now to the seventeenth-century. There is a single signature, only partly legible, on the final leaf: “George {???}”

3) The eighteenth-century and nineteenth-century: The ownership inscription of James Leatherbarrow appears on the first leaf and reads :

 

“Jas Leatherbarrow’s book 1751 No[vember] 13”

A nineteenth-century inscription on the rear flyleaf records the names of the subsequent owners of this manuscript: “This book belonged to James Leatherbarrow in 1751. See the name on the first page_by whom it was given to his Brother John Leatherbarrow, who gave it to his Daughter Mrs. Ann Lithgow, who gave it to her edest Daughter Mrs.Gasney & from her it came into the possession of her sister Elizabeth Lithgow. February 14, 1841” In another inscription John Lithgow identifies hiself as the son of Anne Lithgow.

From John Lithgow the manuscript passed to William Ormerod (1818-1860)

IMG_0736

The English manuscript :IMG_0734

Surrounding, or rather filling the entire margins of the Psalter. The work is part religious, part history, and part chronicle. The, as of now, unidentified author’s purpose is to expose the usurpation of the Church and the throne of England by Protestants, beginning with Lord Somerset, and to demonstrate the legitimate authority of the Catholic Church by tracing the history of Christanity in England and chronicling – using lists excerpted from other sources- the succession of the kings and bishops of England. A number of printed and at least one manuscript work are quoted in full while others are digested or presented only in excerpt. The author of the manuscript then comments then comments upon these works, often at length, making the voices of our author and his sources difficult to parse.

IMG_0735

The author cites a number of late seventeenth-century works, including Burnet’s “History of the Reformation”,and Jeremy Collier’s Historical Dictionary. A reference to John Harris’ Lexicon Technicum gives a terminus post quem of 1704.

IMG_0746

 

page14image8196256

IMG_0731
page15image8240000

 

page15image8237312

A Sammelband Of Aristotle commentaries . 1499-1509

253J   Aristotle, and Peter Tartaretus  (14??-1495)                                 $18,000

  • IMG_0693Expositio magistri Petri Tatereti in Summulas Petri Hyspani cum textu, una cum additionibus in locis propriis summa accuratione, summaque animadversione impressa..

  • 0229_02_popup

With

  • Clarissima singularisq[ue] totius philosophie necnon methaphisice Aristotelis magistri Petri Tatareti expositio.IMG_0707

With

  • Expositio magistri Petri Tatereti super textu logices Aristotelis

IMG_0708

Ad1) [Lugduni] : [Claudii davost al’s de troys.],  8. August 1509  (Date in the colophon:IMG_0709
octaua mensis Augusti anno … M.ccccc.ix.)

 

 

 

 

Ad2) [Lyons] : Impressum cura & industria Claudij davost al[ia]s de troys, 13 July 1509

IMG_0705

Ad 3) Imprints suggested by ISTC [Lyons: Claude Davost, after 1500] or [Nicolaus Wolf ? about 1500] or [n.pr., about 1495].

IMG_0703

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a Very Large Octavo 9 x 5 inches.  Ad1) a-l8 m10.  Ad 2) A-I8, K10, L4, M-T8   Ad3) aa-pp8 qq8

IMG_0694
Front Board
IMG_0697
Rear Board

This copy is bound in its original full calf over wooden boards, as you can se above, much of the leather has been lost exposing all the structural features of the construction of the book. It is lacking clasps but retains the catches and remnants of the attachment points of the clasps.

IMG_0707Woodcut initials and quite a few schematic text woodcuts. Spaces and guide letters for large initials not filled in and individual marginalia by old hand. This copy is bound in its original full blind stamped calf over wooden boards. With the old ownership notes (including “Samuel Hoffmanns”, the other deleted) verso with contemporary note. Occasionally contemporary marginalia in red and black ink. With the clasps renewed.

This is a rare incunabula edition of the commentary on Aristotle’s Logic by Petrus Tartaretus, follower of Duns Scotus and rector of theUniversity of Paris in 1490. Here is a Memory device for Aristotle in this book.

IMG_0699
Aristotelian diagrams have a long and rich history in philosophical logic. Today, they are widely used in nearly all disciplines dealing with logical reasoning.

IMG_0698The most remarkable Scotist of his time, author of commentaries on the Physics and Ethics of Aristotle, on the Sentences of Peter Lombard and on the Quodlibeta of Duns Scotus.

Most of the bibliographers ascribe the printing of this work to the Lyonese printer Nicolaus Wolff,

 

classified as quarto volume, the dating ranges between 1495 and around or shortly after 1500.

 

 

IMG_0700
Representation of the Christian Aristotelian cosmos

Ad 1)  Panzer, VII,; p. 292, no. 141 Not in Adams or the BM STC, French Books..

Ad 2) USTC no.: 155038  Panzer, VII,; p. 292, no. 140

LIBRARY COPIES:  Universitat de Barcelona , Det Kongelige Bibliotek, Oxford (UK),  Wadham College Library      : Not in Adams or the BM STC, French Books..

Ad 3) Goff T43 = T40; R 758; Pell Ms 10941; IGI V p.153; IBE Post-incunables 249; Sajó-Soltész p.952; Olivar 391; Sack(Freiburg) 3337a; Walsh 3835a; ISTC it00043000

 

Now Back to a beginning !

Ad1) Aristotle ,Petrus Hispanus,Peter of Spain (Petrus Hispanicus Portugalensis)

This work, the first bound in this sammelband is Peter Tartareus’ explanation and direction of Peter Of Spains , Tractatus or Summaries, Tartareus’ follows the structure of Peter of Spain who naturally follows  “Porphry’s Tree”

IMG_0714
Arbor Porphyriana, “Expanding on Aristotle’s Categories and visually alluding to a tree’s trunk, Porphyry’s structure reveals the idea of a layered assembly in logic. It is made of three columns of words, where the central column contains a series of dichomatous divisions between genus and species, whcih derive from the supreme genus, Substance.

“For nearly four centuries, when logic was the heart of what we now call the “undergraduate curriculum,” Peter of Spain’s Summaries of Logic (c. 1230) was the basis for teaching that subject. Because Peter’s students were teenagers, he wrote simply and organized his book carefully. Since no book about logic was read by more people until the twentieth century, the Summaries has extensively and profoundly influenced the distinctly Western way of speaking formally and writing formal prose by constructing well-formed sentences, making valid arguments, and refuting and defending arguments in debate. ” (quoted from Peter of Spain: Summaries of Logic: Text, Translation, Introduction, and Notes 1st Edition by Brian P. Copenhaver, Calvin G. Normore and, Terence Parsons .Oxford University Press;  (December 16, 2014)

“It is still not possible to establish the date of origin of the Tractatus,( and their Summaries) the work that has enjoyed such enormous success. Recent scholarship
suggests that it could have been written any time between the 1220s and the 1250s (Ebbessen 2013, 68–69). It has universally been recognised as a work by Peter of Spain. Another work that has been identified as Peter of Spain’s is aSyncategoreumata (Treatise on Syncategorematic Words), which was probably written some years after the Tractatus.[2] Considering the fact that in all the thirteenth-century manuscripts the Syncategoreumata directly follow the Tractatus, and the number of similarities between doctrinal aspects of these two works on logic, it is almost certain that they were written by the same author. Both works seem to have originated from Southern France or Northern Spain, the region where we also find the earliest commentaries on these treatises.”

The Tractatus

The Tractatus can be divided into two main parts. One part deals with doctrines found in

IMG_0716
The square of opposition is a diagram representing the relations between the four basic categorical propositions.

the so-called logica antiquorum—i.e., the logica vetus (old logic) and logica nova (new logic)—and the other contains doctrines covered by the logica modernorum—viz. the tracts that discuss theproprietates terminorum (properties of terms).

The first main part of the Tractatus divides into five tracts. The first tract, De introductionibus(On introductory topics) explains the concepts used in traditional logic—nomen (noun), verbum(verb), oratio (phrase), propositio (proposition)—and presents the divisions of and the (logical) relationships between propositions. The second tract, De predicabilibus (On the predicables) covers matters dealt with in Boethius’s accounts of Porphyry’s Isagoge. It gives an account of the concept predicabile and the five predicables—genus, species, differentia, proprium, accidens—i.e., the common features of and differences between the predicables, as well as of the terms ’predicatio’ and ’denominativum’. Tract three, De predicamentis (On the categories), discusses the ten Aristotelian categories, as well as some items already dealt with in the previous treatise. The fourth tract, De sillogismis (On syllogisms) mainly goes back to Boethius’s De IMG_0718IMG_0718syllogismis categoricis (On categorical syllogisms). It gives an explanation of the basic element of the syllogism, i.e., propositio, and of the syllogism, and then goes into mood and figure, the proper forms of syllogisms, and briefly deals with what are called paralogisms. The fifth tract, De locis(On topical relationships), is derived from Boethius’s De topicis differentiis (On different topical relationships) I and II. This tract starts off with an explanation of the notions argumentum and argumentatio, and then proceeds to deal with the species of argumentation: syllogism, induction, enthymeme, and example. Next, it gives a definition of locus (the Latin translation of the Greek topos): a locus is the seat of an argument (i.e., the locus is supposed to warrant the inference by bringing it under some generic rule.) The intrinsic loci (= the kind of locus that occurs when the argument is derived from the substance of the thing involved) are covered first, followed by the extrinsic loci (= the kind of locus that occurs when the argument is derived from something that is completely separate from the substance of the thing involved) and intermediary loci (= the kind of locus that occurs when the argument is taken from the things that partly share in the terms of the problem and partly differ from it). Examples are: intrinsic—the locus “from definition”: ‘a rational animal is running; therefore a man is running’; extrinsic—the locus “from opposites”: ‘Socrates is black; therefore he is not white’; intermediary—‘the just is good; therefore justice is good’.

IMG_0722

The second part of the Tractatus comprises subjects that were of major importance in the doctrine of the properties of terms. In the sixth tract, De suppositionibus, the theory of supposition is dealt with. The treatise begins with an exposition of significatio. The definition of significatio runs: significatio is the respresentation of a thing by means of a word in accordance with convention. Next it gives a definition of the related terms suppositio and copulatio, and the differences between the terms significatio, suppositio and copulatio. Of these three suppositioand significatio are the most important in Peter’s semantics. Suppositio is defined as the acceptance of a substantive verb for some thing. Suppositio is dependent on significatio, because supposition can only occur via a term that already has some significatio. Put in other words,significatio pertains to a word by itself, and supposition to a term as actually used in some context.

The tract concludes with a division of suppositio. The first division is into suppositio communis(common supposition) and suppositio discreta (discrete supposition)—e.g., the terms homo(man) and Sortes (Socrates) respectively.

The second division, suppositio communis, is divided into naturalis (natural) and accidentalis(coincidental). Suppositio naturalis is described as the acceptance of a common term for all those things that can share in the common universal nature signified by the term in question—e.g., homo (‘man’) taken by itself by its very nature is able to stand for all men, whether in the past, present or future; suppositio accidentalis is the acceptance of a common term for those things for which the term in question requires an additional term—e.g., in homo est (‘A man is’) the term homo stands for present men, whereas in homo fuit (‘A man has been’) and in homo erit (‘A man will be’) it stands for past men and future men respectively, owing to the additional terms fuit and erit.

The third division, suppositio accidentalis, is divided into suppositio simplex (simple supposition) and suppositio personalis (personal supposition). Suppositio simplex is the acceptance of a term for the universal ‘thing’ it signifies, as in homo est species (‘Man is a species’, animal est genus (‘Animal is a genus’), in which the substantive terms homo and animal stand for the universal man and animal, and not any one of their particulars. Suppositio simplex can occur both in the subject- and in the predicate-term—e.g., homo est species (‘Man is a species’) and omnis homo est animal (‘Every man is an animal’) respectively. Suppositio personalis is the acceptance of a common term for one or more of its particulars, as in homo currit (‘A man is running’).

The fourth division, suppositio personalis, is subdivided into either derterminata (determinate = standing for a certain particular) or confusa (confused = standing for any IMG_0721individual falling under that name). Suppositio determinata occurs when a common term is taken indefinitely or in combination with a particular sign—e.g., homo currit (‘Man is running’) or aliquis homo currit(‘A /some man is running’). Suppositio confusa occurs when a common term is taken in combination with a universal sign (’Every man is running’).

The tract on supposition winds up with the discussion of a few questions regarding the attribution of supposition in a few cases.

The seventh tract of the Tractatus, on fallacies, which forms part of the Aristotelian-Boethian logic, is written in the tradition of the Fallacie maiores (Major fallacies). The eighth tract, De relativis (On relatives) deals with the relative pronouns as defined by Priscian in his Institutiones grammaticae. The relative pronouns are devided into: relatives of substance, such as qui (who), ille (he), alius (another), and relatives of accident, such as talis (of such a kind), qualis (of what kind), tantus (so much), quantus (how much). The former are subdivided into relatives of identity (qui and ille) and relatives of diversity (such as alter and reliquus, both of which can be translated as ‘the other’). The relative of identity is defined in terms of supposition as what refers to and stands for the same thing. These relatives are either reciprocal or non-reciprocal. With regard to the relatives of identity, Peter adds a dicussion of a number of questions about the rationale for using demonstrative pronouns, and some problems concerning how the fallacy of a relative having two diverse referents comes about.

The tract on relatives continues with a brief discussion on the relatives of diversity, accompanied by a rule about the supposition of the relative when it is added to a superior and an inferior in a premiss and a conclusion, as in aliud ab animali; ergo aliud ab homine (‘Something other than an animal; therefore something other than a man’). IMG_0721With regard to relatives of identity a rule of the “ancients”, who deny that a proposition introduced by a relative can have a contradictory opposite, is discussed and rejected. Another rule is given about the identity of supposition of a non-reciprocal relative and what it refers to. The tract concludes with short accounts of relatives of accident.

The ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth tracts of the Tractatus, i.e., the short tracts De ampliationibus (On ampliation), De appellationibus (On appellation), De restrictionibus (On restriction) and De distributionibus (On distribution) are in fact elaborations of the theory of supposition. Ampliation is an extension of the supposition of a term. It occurs when an expression is combined with a modal term—e.g. homo potest esse Antichristus (‘A man can be the Antichrist’), and homo necessario est animal (‘A man is necessarily an animal’)—in which case the supposition of the term ‘man’ is extended to more than just individuals existing in the present. The tract on appellationes is very short: appellation is considered no more than a special case of restriction, i.e., the restricted supposition brought about by a present-tense verb. In this tract the rules of appellation are in fact specific kinds of rules of restriction. The subject of restriction in general is discussed in the eleventh tract. The rules of restriction are the same ones as were presented in the early Parisian textbooks on logic (see de Libera 1982, pp. 176–177). The final tract, on distribution, deals with the multiplication of common terms as a result of their being combined with universal signs. These universal signs are either distributive of substance (such as omnis, nullus), or of accidents (such as qualiscumque, quantuscumque). In this description ‘substance’ is defined as substistent modes of being, and ‘accident’ as accidental modes of being. Separate attention is given to the universal sign omnis (‘all’ or ‘every’) along with a discussion of the common rule that the use of omnis requires three appellata (particular things). The most frequently cited example in these discussions in the thirteenth century was the sophisma omnis phenix est (‘Every phoenix is’). According to Peter of Spain, the use of omnisdoes not call for at least three appellata; an exception to this rule is found in cases in which there is only one appellatum, as is the phoenix-case. The tract also pays attention to a number of tongue-twisting sophisma-sentences.

 

Author and Citation Information for “Peter of Spain”
The latest version of the entry “Peter of Spain” may be cited via the earliest archive in which this version appears:  Spruyt, Joke, “Peter of Spain”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2015 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),

URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/peter-spain/&gt; .The citation above refers to the version in the following archive edition:

Peter Tartaretus  (14??-1495)

PETRUS TARTARETUS (1494),Known for the concept of Pons asinorum (asses’ bridge ). Although of earlier origin, in philosophy this term was applied to the diagram that Peter Tartaretus constructed to assist the student of logic in the discovery of the middle term of a syllogism. The expression suggests that getting students of logic to find the middle term of a syllogism was as difficult as getting asses to cross a bridge.  Hi is also known as the most remarkable Scotist of his time, *Peter Tartaretus (Tataretus) one of the most eminent of the later Scotists, taught at Paris 1490. Edited commentaries on Aristotle 1494, Expositio in Summulas Petri Hispani, first ed. without date, then 1501 and 1503, commentary on Scotus Quodlibetica 1519, and on Scotus’ commentary on the Sentences 1520. “Wetzer und Weltes: Kirchenlexicon, s. v.”

Ad 2) Petrus Tartaretus commentary of the entirety of Aristotle. 

Tartaretus, begins this book by reminding us that he will be following Duns Scotus  or as he says “doctoris subtilis” And dives in to The Phisicorum of Aristotle, followed by De Celo & Mundo, De Generatione & coruptione, Metheororum with some very interesting diagrams,De anima, De Sensu & Sensato, De Memoria, and finally Methaphisice.

 

IMG_0725

 

Ad 3) Peter Tartaretus  (14??-1495) on the Logic of Aristotle . Here Tartaretus comments on Aristotles Organon.    

“In fact, the title Organon reflects a much later controversy about whether logic is a part of philosophy (as the Stoics maintained) or merely a tool used by philosophy (as the later Peripatetics thought); calling the logical works “The Instrument” is a way of taking sides on this point. Aristotle himself never uses this term, nor does he give much indication that these particular treatises form some kind of group, though there are frequent cross-references between the Topics and the Analytics. On the other hand, Aristotle treats the Prior and Posterior Analyticsas one work, and On Sophistical Refutations is a final section, or an appendix, to the Topics). To these works should be added the Rhetoric, which explicitly declares its reliance on the Topics.”

IMG_0702
Aristotelian hexagon a conceptual model of the relationships between the truth values of six statements. It is an extension of Aristotle’s square of opposition.

Quoted from The latest version of the entry “Aristotle’s Logic” may be cited via the earliest archive in which this version appears: Smith, Robin, “Aristotle’s Logic”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/aristotle-logic/&gt;.

 

IMG_0700
Representation of the Christian Aristotelian cosmos

 

C.H. Lohr, ‘Latin Aristotle Commentaries, I, Medieval Authors’, Traditio, XXIII, 1967

Parsons, T.: The traditional square of opposition. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philos- ophy. CSLI (2006)

Khomskii, Y.: William of Sherwood, singular propositions and the hexagon of opposition. In: Be ́ziau, J.Y., Payette, G. (eds.) The Square of Opposition. A General Framework for Cognition, pp. 43–60. Peter Lang (2012)

Read, S.: John Buridan’s theory of consequence and his octagons of opposition. In: Be ́ziau, J.Y., Jacquette, D. (eds.) Around and Beyond the Square of Opposition, pp. 93–110. Springer (2012)

A Sammelband Of Aristotle commentaries . 1499-1509

253J   Aristotle, and Peter Tartaretus  (14??-1495)                                 $18,000

  • IMG_0693Expositio magistri Petri Tatereti in Summulas Petri Hyspani cum textu, una cum additionibus in locis propriis summa accuratione, summaque animadversione impressa..

  • 0229_02_popup

With

  • Clarissima singularisq[ue] totius philosophie necnon methaphisice Aristotelis magistri Petri Tatareti expositio.IMG_0707

With

  • Expositio magistri Petri Tatereti super textu logices Aristotelis

IMG_0708

Ad1) [Lugduni] : [Claudii davost al’s de troys.],  8. August 1509  (Date in the colophon:IMG_0709
octaua mensis Augusti anno … M.ccccc.ix.)

 

 

 

 

Ad2) [Lyons] : Impressum cura & industria Claudij davost al[ia]s de troys, 13 July 1509

IMG_0705

Ad 3) Imprints suggested by ISTC [Lyons: Claude Davost, after 1500] or [Nicolaus Wolf ? about 1500] or [n.pr., about 1495].

IMG_0703

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is a Very Large Octavo 9 x 5 inches.  Ad1) a-l8 m10.  Ad 2) A-I8, K10, L4, M-T8   Ad3) aa-pp8 qq8

IMG_0694
Front Board
IMG_0697
Rear Board

This copy is bound in its original full calf over wooden boards, as you can se above, much of the leather has been lost exposing all the structural features of the construction of the book. It is lacking clasps but retains the catches and remnants of the attachment points of the clasps.

IMG_0707Woodcut initials and quite a few schematic text woodcuts. Spaces and guide letters for large initials not filled in and individual marginalia by old hand. This copy is bound in its original full blind stamped calf over wooden boards. With the old ownership notes (including “Samuel Hoffmanns”, the other deleted) verso with contemporary note. Occasionally contemporary marginalia in red and black ink. With the clasps renewed.

This is a rare incunabula edition of the commentary on Aristotle’s Logic by Petrus Tartaretus, follower of Duns Scotus and rector of theUniversity of Paris in 1490. Here is a Memory device for Aristotle in this book.

IMG_0699
Aristotelian diagrams have a long and rich history in philosophical logic. Today, they are widely used in nearly all disciplines dealing with logical reasoning.

The most remarkable Scotist of his time, author of commentaries on the Physics and Ethics of Aristotle, on the Sentences of Peter Lombard and on the Quodlibeta of Duns Scotus.

Most of the bibliographers ascribe the printing of this work to the Lyonese printer Nicolaus Wolff,

IMG_0698

classified as quarto volume, the dating ranges between 1495 and around or shortly after 1500.

 

IMG_0700

Ad 1)  Panzer, VII,; p. 292, no. 141 Not in Adams or the BM STC, French Books..

Ad 2) USTC no.: 155038  Panzer, VII,; p. 292, no. 140

LIBRARY COPIES:  Universitat de Barcelona , Det Kongelige Bibliotek, Oxford (UK),  Wadham College Library      : Not in Adams or the BM STC, French Books..

Ad 3) Goff T43 = T40; R 758; Pell Ms 10941; IGI V p.153; IBE Post-incunables 249; Sajó-Soltész p.952; Olivar 391; Sack(Freiburg) 3337a; Walsh 3835a; ISTC it00043000

 

Now Back to a beginning !

Ad1) Aristotle ,Petrus Hispanus,Peter of Spain (Petrus Hispanicus Portugalensis)

This work, the first bound in this sammelband is Peter Tartareus’ explanation and direction of Peter Of Spains , Tractatus or Summaries, Tartareus’ follows the structure of Peter of Spain who naturally follows  “Porphry’s Tree”

IMG_0714
Arbor Porphyriana, “Expanding on Aristotle’s Categories and visually alluding to a tree’s trunk, Porphyry’s structure reveals the idea of a layered assembly in logic. It is made of three columns of words, where the central column contains a series of dichomatous divisions between genus and species, whcih derive from the supreme genus, Substance.

“For nearly four centuries, when logic was the heart of what we now call the “undergraduate curriculum,” Peter of Spain’s Summaries of Logic (c. 1230) was the basis for teaching that subject. Because Peter’s students were teenagers, he wrote simply and organized his book carefully. Since no book about logic was read by more people until the twentieth century, the Summaries has extensively and profoundly influenced the distinctly Western way of speaking formally and writing formal prose by constructing well-formed sentences, making valid arguments, and refuting and defending arguments in debate. ” (quoted from Peter of Spain: Summaries of Logic: Text, Translation, Introduction, and Notes 1st Edition by Brian P. Copenhaver, Calvin G. Normore and, Terence Parsons .Oxford University Press;  (December 16, 2014)

“It is still not possible to establish the date of origin of the Tractatus,( and their Summaries) the work that has enjoyed such enormous success. Recent scholarship
suggests that it could have been written any time between the 1220s and the 1250s (Ebbessen 2013, 68–69). It has universally been recognised as a work by Peter of Spain. Another work that has been identified as Peter of Spain’s is aSyncategoreumata (Treatise on Syncategorematic Words), which was probably written some years after the Tractatus.[2] Considering the fact that in all the thirteenth-century manuscripts the Syncategoreumata directly follow the Tractatus, and the number of similarities between doctrinal aspects of these two works on logic, it is almost certain that they were written by the same author. Both works seem to have originated from Southern France or Northern Spain, the region where we also find the earliest commentaries on these treatises.”

The Tractatus

The Tractatus can be divided into two main parts. One part deals with doctrines found in

IMG_0716
The square of opposition is a diagram representing the relations between the four basic categorical propositions.

the so-called logica antiquorum—i.e., the logica vetus (old logic) and logica nova (new logic)—and the other contains doctrines covered by the logica modernorum—viz. the tracts that discuss theproprietates terminorum (properties of terms).

The first main part of the Tractatus divides into five tracts. The first tract, De introductionibus(On introductory topics) explains the concepts used in traditional logic—nomen (noun), verbum(verb), oratio (phrase), propositio (proposition)—and presents the divisions of and the (logical) relationships between propositions. The second tract, De predicabilibus (On the predicables) covers matters dealt with in Boethius’s accounts of Porphyry’s Isagoge. It gives an account of the concept predicabile and the five predicables—genus, species, differentia, proprium, accidens—i.e., the common features of and differences between the predicables, as well as of the terms ’predicatio’ and ’denominativum’. Tract three, De predicamentis (On the categories), discusses the ten Aristotelian categories, as well as some items already dealt with in the previous treatise. The fourth tract, De sillogismis (On syllogisms) mainly goes back to Boethius’s De IMG_0718IMG_0718syllogismis categoricis (On categorical syllogisms). It gives an explanation of the basic element of the syllogism, i.e., propositio, and of the syllogism, and then goes into mood and figure, the proper forms of syllogisms, and briefly deals with what are called paralogisms. The fifth tract, De locis(On topical relationships), is derived from Boethius’s De topicis differentiis (On different topical relationships) I and II. This tract starts off with an explanation of the notions argumentum and argumentatio, and then proceeds to deal with the species of argumentation: syllogism, induction, enthymeme, and example. Next, it gives a definition of locus (the Latin translation of the Greek topos): a locus is the seat of an argument (i.e., the locus is supposed to warrant the inference by bringing it under some generic rule.) The intrinsic loci (= the kind of locus that occurs when the argument is derived from the substance of the thing involved) are covered first, followed by the extrinsic loci (= the kind of locus that occurs when the argument is derived from something that is completely separate from the substance of the thing involved) and intermediary loci (= the kind of locus that occurs when the argument is taken from the things that partly share in the terms of the problem and partly differ from it). Examples are: intrinsic—the locus “from definition”: ‘a rational animal is running; therefore a man is running’; extrinsic—the locus “from opposites”: ‘Socrates is black; therefore he is not white’; intermediary—‘the just is good; therefore justice is good’.

IMG_0722

The second part of the Tractatus comprises subjects that were of major importance in the doctrine of the properties of terms. In the sixth tract, De suppositionibus, the theory of supposition is dealt with. The treatise begins with an exposition of significatio. The definition of significatio runs: significatio is the respresentation of a thing by means of a word in accordance with convention. Next it gives a definition of the related terms suppositio and copulatio, and the differences between the terms significatio, suppositio and copulatio. Of these three suppositioand significatio are the most important in Peter’s semantics. Suppositio is defined as the acceptance of a substantive verb for some thing. Suppositio is dependent on significatio, because supposition can only occur via a term that already has some significatio. Put in other words,significatio pertains to a word by itself, and supposition to a term as actually used in some context.

The tract concludes with a division of suppositio. The first division is into suppositio communis(common supposition) and suppositio discreta (discrete supposition)—e.g., the terms homo(man) and Sortes (Socrates) respectively.

The second division, suppositio communis, is divided into naturalis (natural) and accidentalis(coincidental). Suppositio naturalis is described as the acceptance of a common term for all those things that can share in the common universal nature signified by the term in question—e.g., homo (‘man’) taken by itself by its very nature is able to stand for all men, whether in the past, present or future; suppositio accidentalis is the acceptance of a common term for those things for which the term in question requires an additional term—e.g., in homo est (‘A man is’) the term homo stands for present men, whereas in homo fuit (‘A man has been’) and in homo erit (‘A man will be’) it stands for past men and future men respectively, owing to the additional terms fuit and erit.

The third division, suppositio accidentalis, is divided into suppositio simplex (simple supposition) and suppositio personalis (personal supposition). Suppositio simplex is the acceptance of a term for the universal ‘thing’ it signifies, as in homo est species (‘Man is a species’, animal est genus (‘Animal is a genus’), in which the substantive terms homo and animal stand for the universal man and animal, and not any one of their particulars. Suppositio simplex can occur both in the subject- and in the predicate-term—e.g., homo est species (‘Man is a species’) and omnis homo est animal (‘Every man is an animal’) respectively. Suppositio personalis is the acceptance of a common term for one or more of its particulars, as in homo currit (‘A man is running’).

The fourth division, suppositio personalis, is subdivided into either derterminata (determinate = standing for a certain particular) or confusa (confused = standing for any IMG_0721individual falling under that name). Suppositio determinata occurs when a common term is taken indefinitely or in combination with a particular sign—e.g., homo currit (‘Man is running’) or aliquis homo currit(‘A /some man is running’). Suppositio confusa occurs when a common term is taken in combination with a universal sign (’Every man is running’).

The tract on supposition winds up with the discussion of a few questions regarding the attribution of supposition in a few cases.

The seventh tract of the Tractatus, on fallacies, which forms part of the Aristotelian-Boethian logic, is written in the tradition of the Fallacie maiores (Major fallacies). The eighth tract, De relativis (On relatives) deals with the relative pronouns as defined by Priscian in his Institutiones grammaticae. The relative pronouns are devided into: relatives of substance, such as qui (who), ille (he), alius (another), and relatives of accident, such as talis (of such a kind), qualis (of what kind), tantus (so much), quantus (how much). The former are subdivided into relatives of identity (qui and ille) and relatives of diversity (such as alter and reliquus, both of which can be translated as ‘the other’). The relative of identity is defined in terms of supposition as what refers to and stands for the same thing. These relatives are either reciprocal or non-reciprocal. With regard to the relatives of identity, Peter adds a dicussion of a number of questions about the rationale for using demonstrative pronouns, and some problems concerning how the fallacy of a relative having two diverse referents comes about.

The tract on relatives continues with a brief discussion on the relatives of diversity, accompanied by a rule about the supposition of the relative when it is added to a superior and an inferior in a premiss and a conclusion, as in aliud ab animali; ergo aliud ab homine (‘Something other than an animal; therefore something other than a man’). IMG_0721With regard to relatives of identity a rule of the “ancients”, who deny that a proposition introduced by a relative can have a contradictory opposite, is discussed and rejected. Another rule is given about the identity of supposition of a non-reciprocal relative and what it refers to. The tract concludes with short accounts of relatives of accident.

The ninth, tenth, eleventh, and twelfth tracts of the Tractatus, i.e., the short tracts De ampliationibus (On ampliation), De appellationibus (On appellation), De restrictionibus (On restriction) and De distributionibus (On distribution) are in fact elaborations of the theory of supposition. Ampliation is an extension of the supposition of a term. It occurs when an expression is combined with a modal term—e.g. homo potest esse Antichristus (‘A man can be the Antichrist’), and homo necessario est animal (‘A man is necessarily an animal’)—in which case the supposition of the term ‘man’ is extended to more than just individuals existing in the present. The tract on appellationes is very short: appellation is considered no more than a special case of restriction, i.e., the restricted supposition brought about by a present-tense verb. In this tract the rules of appellation are in fact specific kinds of rules of restriction. The subject of restriction in general is discussed in the eleventh tract. The rules of restriction are the same ones as were presented in the early Parisian textbooks on logic (see de Libera 1982, pp. 176–177). The final tract, on distribution, deals with the multiplication of common terms as a result of their being combined with universal signs. These universal signs are either distributive of substance (such as omnis, nullus), or of accidents (such as qualiscumque, quantuscumque). In this description ‘substance’ is defined as substistent modes of being, and ‘accident’ as accidental modes of being. Separate attention is given to the universal sign omnis (‘all’ or ‘every’) along with a discussion of the common rule that the use of omnis requires three appellata (particular things). The most frequently cited example in these discussions in the thirteenth century was the sophisma omnis phenix est (‘Every phoenix is’). According to Peter of Spain, the use of omnisdoes not call for at least three appellata; an exception to this rule is found in cases in which there is only one appellatum, as is the phoenix-case. The tract also pays attention to a number of tongue-twisting sophisma-sentences.

 

Author and Citation Information for “Peter of Spain”
The latest version of the entry “Peter of Spain” may be cited via the earliest archive in which this version appears:  Spruyt, Joke, “Peter of Spain”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2015 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.),

URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2015/entries/peter-spain/&gt; .The citation above refers to the version in the following archive edition:

Peter Tartaretus  (14??-1495)

PETRUS TARTARETUS (1494),Known for the concept of Pons asinorum (asses’ bridge ). Although of earlier origin, in philosophy this term was applied to the diagram that Peter Tartaretus constructed to assist the student of logic in the discovery of the middle term of a syllogism. The expression suggests that getting students of logic to find the middle term of a syllogism was as difficult as getting asses to cross a bridge.  Hi is also known as the most remarkable Scotist of his time, *Peter Tartaretus (Tataretus) one of the most eminent of the later Scotists, taught at Paris 1490. Edited commentaries on Aristotle 1494, Expositio in Summulas Petri Hispani, first ed. without date, then 1501 and 1503, commentary on Scotus Quodlibetica 1519, and on Scotus’ commentary on the Sentences 1520. “Wetzer und Weltes: Kirchenlexicon, s. v.”

Ad 2) Petrus Tartaretus commentary of the entirety of Aristotle. 

Tartaretus, begins this book by reminding us that he will be following Duns Scotus  or as he says “doctoris subtilis” And dives in to The Phisicorum of Aristotle, followed by De Celo & Mundo, De Generatione & coruptione, Metheororum with some very interesting diagrams,De anima, De Sensu & Sensato, De Memoria, and finally Methaphisice.

 

IMG_0725

 

Ad 3) Peter Tartaretus  (14??-1495) on the Logic of Aristotle . Here Tartaretus comments on Aristotles Organon.    

“In fact, the title Organon reflects a much later controversy about whether logic is a part of philosophy (as the Stoics maintained) or merely a tool used by philosophy (as the later Peripatetics thought); calling the logical works “The Instrument” is a way of taking sides on this point. Aristotle himself never uses this term, nor does he give much indication that these particular treatises form some kind of group, though there are frequent cross-references between the Topics and the Analytics. On the other hand, Aristotle treats the Prior and Posterior Analyticsas one work, and On Sophistical Refutations is a final section, or an appendix, to the Topics). To these works should be added the Rhetoric, which explicitly declares its reliance on the Topics.”

IMG_0702
Aristotelian hexagon a conceptual model of the relationships between the truth values of six statements. It is an extension of Aristotle’s square of opposition.

Quoted from The latest version of the entry “Aristotle’s Logic” may be cited via the earliest archive in which this version appears: Smith, Robin, “Aristotle’s Logic”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/aristotle-logic/&gt;.

 

IMG_0700
Representation of the Christian Aristotelian cosmos

 

C.H. Lohr, ‘Latin Aristotle Commentaries, I, Medieval Authors’, Traditio, XXIII, 1967

Parsons, T.: The traditional square of opposition. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philos- ophy. CSLI (2006)

Khomskii, Y.: William of Sherwood, singular propositions and the hexagon of opposition. In: Be ́ziau, J.Y., Payette, G. (eds.) The Square of Opposition. A General Framework for Cognition, pp. 43–60. Peter Lang (2012)

Read, S.: John Buridan’s theory of consequence and his octagons of opposition. In: Be ́ziau, J.Y., Jacquette, D. (eds.) Around and Beyond the Square of Opposition, pp. 93–110. Springer (2012)

Fascicule XIX PDF is done!

Index XIX

234J Magister Adam also Raymmundus de Pennaforti. Goff A48 (Harvard, Library of Congress, Univ. of California, Law Library,Yale)                     https://data.cerl.org/istc/ia00048000

H19386-L153309886-1 2245J Guillermus Altissodorensis Goff G718   https://data.cerl.org/istc/ig00707500

269J Aquinas Goff  T198 Columbia, Free Library of Philadelphia, Morgan,Huntington, UCLA, U.of Illinois.  https://data.cerl.org/istc/it00198000

253J Aristotle, and Tartaretus   Goff T43=T40 (Harvard, Johns Hopkins Univ ,Smithsonian Institution,)    https://data.cerl.org/istc/it00043000

998G Bernardus  Basinus Not in Goff, 1 US copy SMU. https://data.cerl.org/istc/ib00279500

 

10H   Boethius. Not in Goff . no US copies. https://data.cerl.org/istc/ib00782500

 

144J   Boethius  Goff B796 (one copy Harvard) https://data.cerl.org/istc/ib00796000

 

262J   Bonaventura Not In Goff ; https://data.cerl.org/istc/ib00895300

img_0420

 

942G Carcano Goff C197; (HEHL,Harv,CL,LC,St Bonaventure, Univ of Kentucky, Univ. of Minn)

https://data.cerl.org/istc/ic00197000

 

756G     Diodorus Siculus Goff  D214 (Harvard, U.S. NLM, Williams College,Yale )
https://data.cerl.org/istc/id00214000

 

945G Eusebius  Goff E119; (Boston Public Library, Indiana Univ., The Lilly Library (- 2 ff.) YUL)

https://data.cerl.org/istc/ie00119000

 

 

276J.  Jean Gerson Goff G 260 (Indiana Univ., Johns Hopkins Univ., Library of Congress, U.S. NLM, Princeton Univ)

 

https://data.cerl.org/istc/ig00260000

 

 

172J   [Vellum Printed Book of Hours} Goff H412;(Cambridge, Oxford, Bodleian Library, Canada;Quebec Laval UL (vell)

France;Besançon  BM,Paris, BNF) Number of holding institutions 5)https://data.cerl.org/istc/ih00412000

 

251J   Hugo of St. Cher Not in Goff   https://data.cerl.org/istc/ih00527600

 

256J  Isocrates Goff I215(Harvard, Phyllis and John Gordan, Huntington) https://data.cerl.org/istc/ii00215000

 

957G  Richard  Mediavilla [Middleton], Goff M 424;.( St Louis Univ., Pius XII Memorial Library  (-) & YUL – i.e. both defective)DSC_0027

add UCLA.            https://data.cerl.org/istc/im00422800

 

277J.   Orosius Goff O-97.  https://data.cerl.org/istc/io00097000

 

238J       Peregrinus of Opole Goff P267 (Harvard University (- ff 189-278)Bryn Mawr College, (ff 239-278))

https://data.cerl.org/istc/ip00267000

 

145J     Paulus Pergulensis Goff P195 (Princeton Univ (2) and The Newberry Library)

https://data.cerl.org/istc/ip00195000

 

233J     De Monte Rochen Not in Goff; GW 11779; Kraus Cat. 182 no.125; IGI 4593

Holding institutions 3: Aosta Sem, Bucharest BN: Brown Univ.    https://data.cerl.org/istc/ig00608500

 

235J    Nicolaus Tygrinus Goff T563  https://data.cerl.org/istc/it00565500

 

246J   Gerardus de Zutphania Goff G177 (B.P.L, Bryn Mawr College, Free Library of Philadelphia,LC,Ohio State Univ

HEHL (2),Newberry Library, Univ. of Houston,Yale (2))  https://data.cerl.org/istc/ig00177000

 

Ok sphere is the PDF.fasciculexix

And here google dox

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Mhtw_bvEYiOIym3qkFaTpEOWqvF6BdCR/view?usp=sharing

265358_0

DSC_0263

img_0674

Gerson on “Pollutione Nocturna”

276J.  Jean Gerson 

Incipit tractatulus venerabil[is] m[a]g[ist]ri Johannis Gerson cancellarij Parisiensis tractans de polluc[i]o[n]e nocturna an impediat celebrantem an non

[Cologne : Johann Guldenschaff, about 1480]                       SOLD

046654_2
Gerson De Polluc[i]o[n]e Nocturna Guldenschaff ca. 1480

All incunable editions are undated and unsigned by their printers.  ISTC locates 15  incunable editions of this practical text which testifies to a real demand. Yet the fact that they are all printed anonymously might make one wonder.

img_0664Gerson wrote this treaties around 1412, In Brian Patrick McGuire’s Biography of Gerson [Jean Gerson and the Last Medieval Reformation .Pennsylvania State University Press 2005]  he discusses at length this “important commentary on his (Gerson)attitude to the body and its functions” 

Gerson commences the Pollutione Nocturna with a personal statement.

“I have frequently and for a long time been in doubt, especially after I was ordained priest, if someone who was polluted by a nighttime dream should refrain from celebrating Mass…..”

Gerson has “to speak in an impure way” to address this Subject but he proceeds in his usual orderly fashion ,with 10 ‘considerationes’  McGuire Describes it thus: “Gerson’s img_0663familiar manner, starting out with free will and choice, as well as the individual’s worthiness to celebrated the Mass, and ending with Detailed instructions on how to cope with bond functions.    …  He asks when it is that a person gives consent. In other words: when semen flowers in sleep to what extent can the individual be considered responsible?”

The fifth considerations tells us:

“No form of pollution that is begun and completed in sleep is a mortal sin”

The psychology and biology which Gerson exposes here is quite interesting.

 

Quarto 8 x 6  Inches unsigned [a-b8].(the first leaf blank and present)        This copy is bound in 19th century boards. The type seems quite archaic and has a roundish face and is called “lettre de somme” for a book from 1480. It is very similar to Zel’s type, (see the image below).

 

Here is a list of the 15 editions, our copy is number 6.

  1. Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. Add: Forma absolutionis sacramentalis. — [Cologne : Ulrich Zel, about 1466]. — 4°
    Bibliographical References: Goff G254; HC 7694* = H 7666; Klebs 459.1; Voull(K) 476; Pell 5219; Polain(B) 1632; IDL 1963; Sajó-Soltész 1418; Voull(B) 678; Schüling 385; Finger 427; Oates 281; Pr 800; BMC I 179; BSB-Ink G-159; GW 10808
    ISTC ig00254000
    4541373
    [Cologne : Ulrich Zel, about 1466].

    2) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. — [Cologne : Ulrich Zel, about 1467]. — 4° Bibliographical References: Goff G255; H 7697 = 7704 (I); Klebs 459.2; Voull(K) 477; Pell 5212; Delisle 820; Polain(B) 1627; IDL 1964; IGI 4257; Voull(B) 678,2; Schlechter-Ries 739; Ohly-Sack 1225; Finger 428; Oates 290; Bod-inc G-122; Sheppard 608; Pr 806; BMC I 180; GW 10809 ISTC ig00255000
  2. inc-ii-576_0001
    De pollutione nocturna — [Cologne: Ulrich Zel, about 1467]
  3. 3) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. — [Cologne : Printer of Dares (Johannes Solidi (Schilling), not after 1472]. — 4° The Basel UB copy has a rubricator’s date 1472. — Bibliographical References: Goff G257; H 7693*; Klebs 459.5; Voull(K) 480; Pell 5215; Arnoult 688; Castan(Besançon) 489, 490; IDL 1967; Sotheby’s (London), 1 July 1994 (Donaueschingen) 183 ; Günt(L) 580; Voull(B) 750; Voull(Trier) 417; Kind(Göttingen) 2138; Rhodes(Oxford Colleges) 839; Pr 995; BMC I 213; BSB-Ink G-162; GW 10812. ISTC ig00257000
    4) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. Add: Henricus de Hassia (the Younger?): Regulae ad cognoscendum differentiam inter peccatum mortale et veniale et Septem signa amoris Dei. — [Esslingen : Conrad Fyner, 1473?]. — 4°
    Bibliographical References: Goff G259; H 7699* (incl H 8400*); Klebs 459.6; Pell 5216; Zehnacker 973; Delisle 821; Sajó-Soltész 1420; Šimáková-Vrchotka 806; Ohly-Sack 1226; Sack(Freiburg) 1559; Hubay(Augsburg) 897; Voull(B) 1143; Walsh 929; Pr 2470; BMC II 512; BSB-Ink G-163; GW 10815. ISTC ig00259000
    5) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. — [Paris : Ulrich Gering, Martin Crantz and Michael Friburger, about 1474]. — 4° Bibliographical References: C 2692; Klebs 459.7; Pell 5217; Arnoult 689; Buffévent 220; Frasson-Cochet 136; Torchet 385; Castan(Besançon) 492; Polain(B) 1630; Martín Abad G-40; Schlechter-Ries 741; Borm 1142; Rhodes(Oxford Colleges) 840; GW 10813 (I) ISTC ig00259400
    6) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. — [Cologne : Johann Guldenschaff, about 1480]. — 4°
    Bibliographical References: Goff G260; C 2691; Klebs 459.8; Voull(K) 481; Polain(B) 1629; IDL 1968; SI 1650; Madsen 1722; Sallander 1734; Voull(B) 905,4; Voull(Trier) 584; Hubay(Augsburg) 898; Sack(Freiburg) 1560; Kind(Göttingen) 2139; GW 10816
    ISTC ig00260000

img_0665

7) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. — [Speyer : Johann and Conrad Hist, about 1485]. — 4°. Reprinted from Gering’s undated Paris editions, Pell 5217 and Pell 5144? (BMC). — Bibliographical References: H 7698*; Pell 5220; Péligry 375; IBP 2388; Engel-Stalla col 1657; Schlechter-Ries 740; Voull(B) 2055; Sack(Freiburg) 1561; Pr 2403A; BMC II 502; BSB-Ink G-164; GW 10817. ISTC ig00261500
8) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. De cognitione castitatis et de pollutionibus diurnis. Add: Forma absolutionis sacramentalis. — [Cologne : Ludwig von Renchen, about 1488]. — 4° GW dates this about 1485. — Bibliographical References: Goff G262; H 7701*; Klebs 461.4; Voull(K) 482; Pell 5218 (I); Aquilon 318; Zehnacker 961; IBP 2390; SI 1652; Sallander 1735; Šimáková-Vrchotka 807; Sack(Freiburg) 1562, 1563; Günt(L) 822; Kind(Göttingen) 2140; Schullian 211; Walsh 425; Pr 1275; BMC I 268; BSB-Ink G-165; Döring-Fuchs G-71; GW 10818 ISTC ig00262000
9) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. De cognitione castitatis et de pollutionibus diurnis. — [Rouen : Guillaume Le Talleur, about 1490]. — 4°
Bibliographical References: Goff G263; H 7703; C 2693; GfT 2270; Klebs 461.3; Verdier(Talleur) XIX; Pell 5221; Castan(Besançon) 493; IBE 2654; IGI 4258; Pr 8789; BMC VIII 392; GW 10821 ISTC ig00263000
10) Gerson, Johannes: Tractatus diversi: De praeparatione ad missam, De pollutione nocturna. De pollutione diurna. De modo vivendi omnium fidelium. Opus tripartitum. Donatus moralisatus. — [Antwerp : Mathias van der Goes, about 1491]. — 4°
Bibliographical References: C 2707 + 2698; Camp 818 (quires i-m) + 821 (quires a-h); ILC 1092; Inv Ant 91; Polain(B) 1640; IDL 1953; Bod-inc G-134; Sheppard 7203; Pr 9429; GW 10839 ISTC ig00273700
11) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. — [Cologne : Ulrich Zel, about 1467-72]. — 4°
Bibliographical References: Goff G256; H 7696*; Klebs 459.3; Voull(K) 478; Pell 5213; Arnoult 687; IDL 1966; Sajó-Soltész 1419; Borm 1140; Voull(B) 679; Voull(Trier) 333; Hubay(Augsburg) 896; Oates 321; Bod-inc G-123; Sheppard 629; Pr 837; BMC I 184; BSB-Ink G-160; GW 10810 ISTC ig00256000
12) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. — [Cologne : Ulrich Zel, about 1472]. — 4°
Dated by Goff about 1472. — Polain dates about 1470. — Bibliographical References: Goff G258; H 7695*; Klebs 459.4; Voull(K) 479; Pell 5214; Zehnacker 972; Polain(B) 1628; IDL 1965; IBPort 769; SI 1649; Kotvan 529; Coll(U) 596; Madsen 1723; Sack(Freiburg) 1558; Finger 429, 430; Borm 1141; Schüling 386; Ernst(Hildesheim) I,I 202; Voull(B) 680; Günt(L) 916; Pad-Ink 274, 275; Oates 373; Pr 872; BMC I 190; BSB-Ink G-161; GW 10811
ISTC ig00258000
13) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. De cognitione castitatis et de pollutionibus diurnis. — [Poland (Chelmno?) : Printer of Leo Papa, ‘Sermones’, about 1474-75]. — 4°
On the location of this printing-house in Poland see E. Szandorowska, in Quaerendo 2 (1972), pp.162-172. The press was previously assigned to the Netherlands (GW) and tentatively to Cologne (V. Scholderer, in BSA 54 (1960) pp.111-13, reprinted in Fifty Essays (Amsterdam, 1966) pp.279-80). — Bibliographical References: Camp-Kron 811a; IBP 2387; SI 1651; Louda 754; Coll(S) 452; Oates 3669; GW 10814 ISTC ig00259500
14) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. De cognitione castitatis et de pollutionibus diurnis. Add: Forma absolutionis sacramentalis. — [Louvain : Johannes de Westfalia, about 1484-87]. — 4° Reproductions of the watermarks found in the paper used in this edition are provided by the Koninklijke Bibliotheek, National Library of the Netherlands. –– Bibliographical References: Goff G261; HC 7702; Klebs 461.2; Camp 812; ILC 1091; Polain(B) 1631; IDL 1969; IBP 2389; Rhodes(Oxford Colleges) 841; BMC IX 153; GW 10819 ISTC ig00261000
15) Gerson, Johannes: De pollutione nocturna. De cognitione castitatis et de pollutionibus diurnis. — [Paris : Pierre Levet, between 1488 and 1490]. — 4°
Bibliographical References: Klebs 461.5; Pell 5222; Parguez 465; Polain(B) 1633; Arnoult 690; GW 10820 ISTC ig00262500

Medieval Latin Hymn Fragment, Part A: “I shall give thanks…” — OPEN BOOK

(ab infantia mea crevit miseratio et ab utero) …egressa est mecu(m). Ps(al)lm. Confitebor…(tibi, Domine) Pecunias suas no(n) dedit ad usuram sed pro captiuis …came out with me. Psalm. I shall give thanks (to you, O Lord)… He did not give his money for usuary but for captives… ipse commutauit Ps(alm). Beatus (vir qui timet Dominum)…

via Medieval Latin Hymn Fragment, Part A: “I shall give thanks…” — OPEN BOOK

British Library Tremulous Hand stars in British Library’s web showcase of medieval literature

Tremulous Hand stars in British Library’s web showcase of medieval literature

Annotations of 13th-century reader, known for shaky notes that helped explain Old English to later generations, now survive in cyberspace

Medieval literature, digitised for the British Library project.
Medieval manuscripts (clockwise): Gawain and the Green Knight, John Lydgate’s Lives of Saints Edmund and Fremund, The Book of the Queen by Christine de Pizan; The Wycliffite Bible, The Canterbury Tales and another page from The Lives of Saints. Composite: British Library Board

The shaky writing of the 13th-century annotator known as the Tremulous Hand, who is believed to have made as many as 50,000 notes on Old English manuscripts in an attempt to make them comprehensible to later readers, is revealed in all its wobbly glory by a new project from the British Library.

The Tremulous Hand is thought today to have suffered from the nerve condition known as “essential tremor”, which results in uncontrollable shaking. He worked on at least 20 Old English manuscripts stored in Worcester. By the 13th century, Old English was no longer spoken in England, and his glosses between the lines of text and in the margins were written in Middle English and Latin, essentially translating bits of the text for his contemporaries. “In other places, he clarified word division and punctuation, and changed spellings. Sometimes he added a doodle, or notamark,” according to the British Library.

Cotton MS Otho C I/2 - The ‘Tremulous Hand’ – a 13th-century annotator whose manuscripts shed light on language change between Old and Middle English
Pinterest
A 13th-century manuscript written by the Tremulous Hand. Photograph: The British Library Board

One of the manuscripts on which the Tremulous Hand worked is part of the British Library’s free new online resource, Discovering Literature: Medieval, which brings together digitised copies of more than 50 medieval manuscripts spanning the fifth to the 15th centuries, and includes some of the period’s most valuable texts, such as Beowulf and Sir Gawain and the Green Knight.

Incredibly fragile, the Beowulf manuscript dates back to the 11th century, and survives in a single manuscript that was singed in a fire in the 18th century.

“The Tremulous Hand was from one of the last generations who would have understood Old English. The language was changing a huge amount, and Old English was no longer spoken generally,” said the British Library’s Mary Wellesley, a specialist in medieval manuscripts. “In a way, we’re pleased he had this essential tremor, because it means we can identify his work on a huge number of manuscripts … He was interested in preservation [and his work] is a metaphor, in a way, for what we’re trying to do with these manuscripts today.”

Covering medieval drama, epic poetry, dream visions and riddles, the British Library project includes the eighth-century illuminated manuscript of Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English People, which Wellesley called “the first great piece of English historical writing”. Describing Christianity in Roman Britain, and the arrival of St Augustine in Kent, it recounts how the English were converted to Christianity.

Bede also tells of the first named English poet, a cowherd named Cædmon who lived at the Abbey of Whitby. According to Bede, Cædmon was one of his age’s greatest poets, but initially, “he was so shy that when the harp came out at parties he would hide,” said Wellesley. But then, Bede recounts, Cædmon had a vision; when he awoke he performed the song he had sung in the dream, amazing everyone.

“All of Cædmon’s poems are lost, but Bede gives a report of one of them – it’s a wonderfully compressed piece of poetic verse,” said Wellesley.

The collection contains many works that have been digitised for the first time, giving the general reader their first access to manuscripts dating back hundreds of years. Two Chaucer manuscripts are included in the Discovering Literature project: a copy of his dream vision, the Parliament of Fowls, in which a group of birds gather on “seynt valentynes day” to choose a mate, believed to be the origin of the idea that 14 February is for lovers; and his Legend of Good Women, an unfinished work that he began in 1386, in which the narrator is chastised by the God of Love and his queen for his treatment of women in prior works.

Several notable early works by female writers also feature in the collection, including early printed extracts of Margery Kempe’s book, the earliest known autobiography in English. These are taken from a drastically edited print from 1501 that effectively silenced Kempe’s voice; her longer, original autobiography, also part of the collection, was discovered by chance in 1934, and restores the author’s own account of her mystical visions and travels. The anchoress Julian of Norwich’s Revelations of Divine Love, the first work authored by a woman in English, and The Book of the Queen by the French author Christine de Pizan, the first woman writer to earn a living from her work, also feature.

“A library is a memory, and the British Library is the nation’s memory,” said Wellesley. “We have these unbelievably precious pieces of our literary heritage and we need to preserve them, but we also need to make them available for new readers. That’s what this is about.”

Launched in 2014, the Discovering Literature site has so far received more than seven million visitors, according to the British Library. Its collections already cover Shakespeare and the Renaissance, the Romantic and Victorian periods, and 20th-century literature and drama, with the library planning to continue adding to the resource until “it covers the whole rich and diverse backbone of English literature, from The Canterbury Tales to The Buddha of Suburbia”.

 

Please visit us at the 2019 Bibliography Week Showcase Thursday January 24, 10-4 French Institute/Alliance Française 22 E 60th Street New York, NY 10065

Bibilography Final_hires.jpegimg_0420

Here is my NYC list.. if anything is of interest let me know asap and I’ll give you a great price.!  (Well maybe)

234J Magister Adam   also  Raymmundus de Pennaforti.
Su[m]mula clarissimi iurisco[n]sultissimiq[ue] viri Raymu[n]di :
[Cologne]: [Retro Minores18 July 1500 $ 9,500

245J William of Auxerre, c.1150-1231
Summa aurea
Parisiis: Pigoucheti 3 Apr. 1500. $27,000

930G Thomas Aquinas ed. Theodoricus de Susteren.
Summa de veritate
Cologne : Quentell, 7 Mar. 1499 $12,500

998G Bernardus Basinus 1445-1510
De magicis artibus et magorum maleficiis
Paris : Antoine Caillaut, $ 28,000

242G Abbot Berno Augiensis (of Reichenau). (987-1048)
Libellus de officio Missæ, quem edidit Rhomæ
[Argentorati]: [In aedibus Schurerianis], 1511 $ 5,500

10H Anicius Manlius Torquatus Severinus Boethius 480-525
De Consolatione Philosophiae : Add: Pseudo- Boethius: De disciplina scholarium (Comm: pseudo- Thomas Aquinas)
[Lyons: Guillaume Le Roy],1487 $16,000

262J Saint Bonaventura (1217-1274)
Vita christi. (Meditationes vitae Christi)
[Paris: Philippe Pigouchet, about 1487]. $11,000

945G Eusebius of Caesarea c. 260-c. 340
Praeparatio evangelica
[ Cologne, Ulrich Zel, not after 1473] $18,000

172J [Printed Book of Hours (Use of Rome) on vellum.
Ces presentes heures a lusaige de Ro[m]me ont este faictes pour Simon Vostre Libraire domourant a Paris a la rue neuue nostre dame a le enseigne sainct Jehan l’evangeliste.
Paris [Pigouchet per] Simon Vostre, 16 Sept 1500. $18 ,000

622G Athansius Kircher 1602-1680
Ars Magna Sciendi, (tomes 1&2)
Amsterdam: Janssonium à Waesberge, & Viduam Elizei Weyerstraet, 1669 $11,500

957G Richard Mediavilla [Middleton], d. 1302/3
Commentum super quartem Sententarium..
Venice: Christophorus Arnoldus, [circa 1476-7]. $22,000

904G Theophilus Metcalfe active 1649.
Manuscript copy of : Short-writing
England: after 1689 and before 1717 $5,500

238J Peregrinus of Opole (1305-12, 1322-27) Jacobus de Voragine (1229-1298) & Nicolaus de Dinkelsbuel (1360-1433) Peregrinus: Sermones de tempore et de sanctis. Add: Jacobus de Voragine: Quadragesimale. Nicolaus de Dinkelsbuel: Concordantia in passionem dominicam
[Ulm: Johann Zainer, not after 1479] (A copy now in Munich BSB has an ownership inscription dated 1479) $19,000

145J Paulus Pergulensis ca -1451.
Logica magistri Pauli Pergulensis.
Venice: Emericus, de Spira, 22 Feb. 1495/96 $12,500
233J De Monte Rochen (active around 1330)
Manipulus Curatoru[m
Unassigned, 24 March 1497 [Lyons: Printer of Persius] $7,800
252J. Timothy Rogers (1658-1728)
A discourse concerning trouble of mind and the disease of melancholly
London : Printed for Thomas Parkhurst $2, 800

235JNicolaus Tygrinus or Tegrinus or Tegrini (1448-1527)
Lucensium Oratio Luculentissima Maximo Alexandro Sexto
[Rome], [Andreas Freitag ],15 October 1492 $5,900
246J Gerardus de Zutphania (1367-1398)
[ De spiritualibus ascensionibus.] Add: David de Augusta: De exterioris et interioris hominis compositione Lib. II, 1 (De quatuor in quibus incipientes deo servire debent esse cauti)
[Basel : Amerbach and Langendorff, not after 1489]. $13,000

189J Anonymous; attributed to George Joye
Our sauiour Iesus Christ hath not ouercharged his chirche with many ceremonies.
[At Zijrik] [i.e. Antwerp : Ruremond?], [1543] $9,000

188J New Testament [Estienne, Robert.]
Τῆς Καινῆς Διαθήκης άπαντα Nouum Testamentum..
[Paris]: Roberti Stephani Regiis typis, 1550. $18,000

226JNew Testament.
The Nevv Testament of Iesus Christ, in the English College of Rhemes.
Printed at Rhemes : By Iohn Fogny, 1582. $45,000

200J Bible Hebrew Robert Stephanus I. (1503-1559
Biblia hebraica cum punctis Vol 1-8
Parisiis : Roberti Stephani, ,1539-1544 $25,000

187J Thomas Cranmer (1489-1556)
A Defence of The True and Catholike doctrine
London : Reynold Wolfe. [1550] $28,000

IMG_0105

186JDesiderius Erasmus von Rotterdam (1466-1538)
The First Tome (and second) or Volume of the Paraphrase of Erasmus upon the newe testament.
London: Whitchurche, Januarie, 1548. $38,000

261J Marcus Tullius Cicero edited by Jacques-Louis Strébée
M. Tullii Ciceronis ad M. Brutum oratorJacobi Lodoici Strebaei commentariis ab authore ipso recognitis illustratus.
Parisiis : ex officina Michaëlis. Vascosani, 1540 $4,200   img_0571

175J Martin Luther (1483-1546)
Ein Brieff D.M. Luther Wider die Sabbather : an einen guten Freund.
Wittemberg , 1538 $6,000

197J Martin Luther (1483-1546)
Vrsach vnd antwort. das Junckfrawen. Kloster. Götlich verlassen mügen.
Augsburg : Heinrich von Steiner 1523 $5,000

171J Ulrich Zwingli (1484-1531)
Qvo pacto ingenvi adolescentes forma[n]di
Basileae : Apud Joannem Bebelium,1523 $12,800

275J James Ferrand
Εροτομανια Or A Treatise Discoursing of the Essence, Causes, Symptomes, Cure of Love, or EROTIQUE MELANCHOLY.
Oxford: by L. Lichfield , 1640. $6,900

Larger descriptions Below, full descriptions are available! as well as lots of images! 

 
234J Magister Adam [de Aldersbach ](d1408.) also Raymmundus de Pennaforti. (1180-1275)

“Su[m]mula clarissimi iurisco[n]sultissimiq[ue] viri Raymu[n]di : demu[m] reuisa ac castigatissime correcta : breuissimo co[m]pe[n]dio sacrame[n]torum alta co[m]plectens mysteria. de sortilegis. symonia. furto. rapina. vsura. etq[ue] [sic] varijs casibus”

[Cologne]: [Retro Minores, for Heinrich Quentell], 18 July 1500 $ 9,500

Quarto. 8 x5 ½ inches : a-s6 t-v4 x-z6 (lacking one leaf x2 ( folio cxvii) aa-cc6 dd4.. This copy is bound in late 19th century quarter calf & marbled paper boards, rubbed with, light soiling and water stains. Numerous early or contemporary notes. And three full pages of notes at the end.

An epitome in verse of Raymond of Peñafort’s Summa de poenitentia et matrimonio, with commentary and interlinear glosses. More than simply a list of sins and suggested penances, it discussed pertinent doctrines and laws of the Church that pertained to the problem or case brought to the confessor, and is widely considered an authoritative work on the subject

Copies in the U.S.:
1)Harvard
2)Library of Congress,
3)Univ. of California
4)Yale Univ.

Goff A48; H 13710*; Voull(K) 998; Pell Ms 9995 (9785); Polain(B) 11; IBE 29; IDL 11; IBP 21; Voull(B) 996; Sack(Freiburg) 21; Wilhelmi 1; Kind (Göttingen) 1214; Walsh 467; Pr 1366; BMC I 292; BSB-Ink A-23; GW 216.
The first medieval theologian to develop a systematic treatise on free will, the virtues, and the natural law.

245J Guillermus Altissodorensis, or William of Auxerre, c.1150-1231

Summa aurea in quattuor libros sententiarum : a subtilissimo doctore Magistro Guillermo altissiodore[n]si edita. quam nuper amendis q[uam]plurimis doctissimus sacre theologie professor magister Guillermus de quercu diligenti admodum castigatione emendauit ac tabulam huic pernecessariam edidit

Parisiis: Pigoucheti 3 Apr. 1500. $27,000

Folio, A-z8, §8ç8A-M8, N10, A-B6, C8.

FIRST EDITION of the major work by William of Auxerre., William treats creation, natural law, the nature of man, a tripartite God, usury, end the Last Judgment, disquisition on usury and the natural law basis of economic matters among other topics. He applies the critical reasoning of classical philosophy to that of scholastic philosophy.
The “Summa Aurea”, which is not, as it is sometimes described, a mere compendium of the “Books of Sentences” by Peter the Lombard. Both in method and in content it shows a considerable amount of originality, although, Summæ it discusses many problems neglected by the Lombard and passes over others. It is divided into four books: The One and True God (bk. 1); creation, angels, and man (bk. 2); Christ and the virtues (bk. 3); Sacraments and the four last things (bk. 4).
Us copies:
Astrik L. Gabriel, Notre Dame IN,
Boston Public, Bryn Mawr, Columbia ,
Huntington, Univ.of Chicago, Univ. of Wisconsin
Goff G718; BMC VIII, 122 ; GW 11861; Proctor 8206 ; Polain 1787 ; Bod-inc G-295; Sheppard 6326; Pr 8206;

“Truth consists of an adequation between the intellect and a thing”

930G Thomas Aquinas 1225-1274. editor Theodoricus de Susteren.

Summa de veritate celeberrimi doctoris s[an]cti Thome Aquinatis. que olim … me[n]dis scatebat. Nouissime iam per … magistru[m] nostru[m] Theodericum de Susteren co[n]uentus Coloniens[is] fratru[m] predicatoru[m] regentem … laboriose reuisa … feliciter incipit.

Cologne : Heinrich Quentell, 7 Mar. 1499 $12,500
Folio 10 1/2 X 8 inches 2°: A-Z6,Aa-Gg6; {signature Dd signed De} Third Edition, the final 15th century edition.

Summa de veritate celeberrimi doctoris sancti Thome Aquinatis…”First written around 1256, Thomas Aquinas’ “Disputed Questions on Truth” defends “the view that truth consists of an adequation between the intellect and a thing. Aquinas develops a notion of truth of being (“ontological truth”) along with truth of the intellect (what might be called “logical truth”)” (Wippel, 295)
US COPIES
Columbia University, Huntington,
Library of Congress,
Mass Historical Society, Yale.

Only one Copy in The British Isles (BL)
Goff T181; 1; H 1421*; C 564?; Sack(Freiburg) 3419; Rhodes(Oxford Colleges) 1694; Pr 1353B; BMC I 289.

998G Bernardus Basinus 1445-1510

De magicis artibus et magorum maleficiis
(Tractatus exquisitissimus de magicis artibus et ma//gorum maleficiis, per sacre scientie Parisiensem doctorem ma//gistrum Bernardum Basim, canonicum Cesaraugusta//nensem, in suis vesperis compilatus. )
Paris : Antoine Caillaut,1491-1492?

(Dated by CIBN: Bibliothèque Nationale. Catalogue des incunables. T. I (Xylographes, A-G);. Paris, 1981-2014. B-182) $ 28,000

Quarto. 7 ¾ x 5 ¼ inches a8 b6. 14 of 14 leaves. This copy is bound recently in older limp vellum. Second Edition. First Published in 1483, (Goff B-279 listing four copies)

This treatise on magical practices was based on a speech Basin delivered in Paris before an assembly of cardinals in 1482. Basin was born 1445 in Zaragoza and he received his Doctors degree in Paris, having study there theology and canon law. In nine propositions he explains how people enlist the help of demons and if the practise of such diabolic magic makes a person a heretic. Basin states that magic arts, such as involving the invocation of demons and pacts must be been prohibited by all laws, civil and canon alike.

Only one copy in the US
: (not in Goff) Southern Methodist Univ., Bridwell Library

Not in Goff: Dated by CIBN; Pell (Lyon) 40; Bod-inc B-132; Sheppard 6190; Pr 7967; BSB-Ink B-233; GW 3720 ; CIBN B-182; Aquilon 89; Parguez 146.

242G Abbot Berno Augiensis (of Reichenau). (987-1048)
Libellus de officio Missæ, quem edidit Rhomæ
[Argentorati]: [In aedibus Schurerianis], 1511 $ 5,500
Quarto 8 X 5 ½ inches A-B8, C5 (lacking C6 blank)
This copy is bound in modern vellum backed boards. This copy is large and clean and beautifully rubricated throughout. Berno was the Abbot of Reichenau from his appointment by Henry II, Holy Roman Emperor, in 1008 on. He worked on the reformation of the Gregorian chant.

Following the reforms initiated under Abbot Immo, who imposed the Benedictine rule at Reichenau, Berno’s enlightened guidance the abbey reached its peak as a centre of learning, with a productive scriptorium, as a centre of Bendictine monasticism and eleventh-century liturgical and musical reforms in the German churches. At Reichenau he erected the tall western tower and transept that stand today on the island site of Reichenau-Mittelzell. [ UNESCO World Heritage Site #218] One of his most famous students was Hermann of Reichenau, who transmitted Arabic mathematics and astronomy to central Europe.
Muller, Bibl. Strasbourgeoise II, S. 179; VD 16 B-2051
No copy of this Edition in North America.

10H Anicius Manlius Torquatus Severinus Boethius 480-525

De Consolatione Philosophiae : Sacti thome de aquino super libris boetii de solatoe philosophie comentum cu expositione feliciter incipit. [fol. 168 recto:] In diui Seuerini Boetij de scolarium disciplina commentarium feliciter incipit.. Add: Pseudo- Boethius: De disciplina scholarium (Comm: pseudo- Thomas Aquinas)

[Lyons: Guillaume Le Roy],1487 $16,000
Folio 9 ½ X 6 ¾ inches. 235 leaves of 238. lacking Only three blanks: x6, A1, and I8;

a2-8,b-v8 (a1 blank and lacking) x6; A2-8, B-I8. 45 lines of commentary, which surrounds the text, to a page. Ff. 1, 166, 167, 238, blank, are wanting. 235 of 238 leaves.

Boethius became the connecting link between the logical and metaphysical science of antiquity and the scientific attempts of the Middle Ages. His influence on medieval thought was still greater through his De consolatione philosophiae (written while in prison at Pavia) and the theological writings attributed to him. Whether Boethius was a Christian has been doubted; and it is certain that the Consolatio makes no mention of Christ, and all the comfort it contains it owes to the optimism of the Neoplatonic school and to the stoicism of Seneca. Nevertheless, for a long time the book was read with the greatest reverence by all Christendom, and its author was regarded as a martyr for the true faith” (Schaff-Herzog). GW ascribes the commentary on De consolatione to Thomas Waleys.
The colophon has an interesting Acrostic reading
“CONRADUS”
Not in Goff. H 3402; C 1103 = 1114; Pell 2502 & 2557; CIBN B-576; Hillard 431; Aquilon 149; Arnoult 309; Parguez 229; Péligry 196; Polain(B) 4217; IGI 1827; Kind (Göttingen) 232; Pr 8513A; BMC VIII 238.
262J Saint Bonaventura (1217-1274)

Vita christi. (Meditationes vitae Christi)

[Paris: Philippe Pigouchet, about 1487]. $11,000

[Originally assigned by BL to Caillaut and sometimes attributed to Johannes de Caulibus (BBFN Inc p.119f)]

Quarto 7 3/4 x 5 1/2 inches a-i8. 72 leaves of 72. This copy is completely rubricated, paragraph signs and underlining in red, and bound in an early (but later) limp vellum binding.
This work’s precise date of composition, and its author, has occasioned much debate. Until the late nineteenth century, it was traditionally ascribed to Bonaventure. Once it was realised that the work was not by him, but by an unknown author, the ascription was changed to pseudo-Bonaventure, now of unknown author. It has since been thought to be the work of a Franciscan friar.
Newly discovered documentary evidence showed that the work was indeed that of a Franciscan, and was written around 1300 by Jacobus de Sancto Geminiano, who is also identifiable as the leader of a revolt of Tuscan spirituals, one of the Fraticelli, in 1312.
The work’s popularity in the Middle Ages is evidenced by the survival of over two hundred manuscript copies, including seventeen illuminated ones. The popularity of the work increased further with early printed editions, with a surviving Venetian blockbook of 1497.

The work’s detailed evocations of moments from the Gospels influenced art, and it has been shown to be the source of aspects of the iconographyof the fresco cycle of the Life of Christ in the Scrovegni Chapel by Giotto. It has also been credited with inspiring the great increase in depictions of the Veil of Veronica from the late 14th century.
World wide holdings:

British Library (IA.40282)
British Isles Cambridge,
France Cambrai BM, Metz BM,Troyes
BM (2)Valognes BM (imperfect)
Vire BM (copy destroyed),
Germany Isny NikolaiK,
Sweden Stockholm Swedish anonymous
Switzerland Luzern ZB,
Ukraine Kiev NL

Number of holding institutions 11

Not In Goff ; BMC VIII 112; GW 4747;Pell 2698; Arnoult 329; Girard 125; SI 855; Leuze(Isny) 165; Oates 3068.
The “Praeparitio” is a gigantic feat of erudition

945G Eusebius of Caesarea c. 260-c. 340

Eusebius Pa[m]phili de eua[n]gelica preparac[i]o[n]e ex greco in latinu[m] translatus Incipit feliciter.

[ Cologne, Ulrich Zel, not after 1473] $18,000

Folio 10 ¾ x 7 ¾ inches. [a]12, [b-o]10, [p]8 152 of 152 leaves

One of the earliest editions most likely the Second, (editio princeps : Venice 1470)

This copy contains the fifteen books of the “Praeparatio evangelica,” whose purpose is “to justify the Christian in rejecting the religion and philosphy of the Greeks in favor of that of the Hebrews, and then to justify him in not observing the Jewish manner of life […] “The following summary of its contents is taken from Mr. Gifford’s introduction to his translation of the “Praeparitio:

The first three books discuss the threefold system of Pagan Theology: Mythical, Allegorical, and Political. The next three, IV-VI, give an account of the chief oracles, of the worship of demons, and of the various opinions of Greek Philosophers on the doctrines of Fate and Free Will. Books VII-IX give reasons for preferring the religion of the Hebrews founded chiefly on the testimony of various authors to the excellency of their Scriptures and the truth of their history. In Books X-XII Eusebius argues that the Greeks had borrowed from the older theology and philosphy of the Hebrews, dwelling especially on the supposed dependence of Plato upon Moses. In the the last three books, the comparson of Moses with Plato is continued, and the mutual contradictions of other Greek Philosphers, especially the Peripatetics and Stoics, are exposed and criticized.”

The “Praeparitio” is a gigantic feat of erudition, and according to Harnack (Chronologie, II, p. 120), was, like many of Eusebius’ other works, actually composed during the stress of the persecution. It ranks, with the Chronicle, second only to the Church History in importance, because of its copious extracts from ancient authors, whose works have perished.” (CE)

It is also very interesting because of its numerous lively fragments from historians and philosophers which are nowhere else preserved, e.g. a summary of the writings of the Phoenician priest Sanchuniathon, or the account from Diodorus Siculus’ sixth book of Euhemerus’ wondrous voyage to the island of Panchaea, and writings of the neo-Platonist philosopher Atticus.

Goff E119; BMC I 194
U. S COPIES
Boston Public Library
Indiana Univ.,
The Lilly Library (- 2 ff.)
YUL);

172J [Printed Book of Hours (Use of Rome) on vellum.

Hours of the Blessed Virgin MARY

Ces presentes heures a lusaige de Ro[m]me ont este faictes pour Simon Vostre Libraire domourant a Paris a la rue neuue nostre dame a le enseigne sainct Jehan l’evangeliste.
Paris [Philippe Pigouchet per] Simon Vostre, 16 Sept 1500. $18 ,000

Quarto 8 1/4 x 5 1/2 inches. a-l 8; A 8: 88 of 96 leaves printed on vellum. The “Sensuiuent les sept pseaulmes en françoys lacking (the second A 1-8 lacking “not surprisingly other copies are lacking the final ‘A’ quire).

The present Horae are illustrated with 22 full-page engravings in the text and numerous and smaller cuts, metalcut historiated and ornamental borders on every page, many with criblé grounds, depicting biblical scenes, the Virtues, the stag hunt, apple harvest and memento mori vignettes depicting including Pigouchet’s Dance of Death series (Claudin II, 53-53)

Goff H412; C 3106; Bohatta, H. Livres d’Heures;(1924) 730 = 705;
Lacombe 109; Pell Ms 5892 (5878); Castan(Besançon) 554; Adams H1007; GW 13263.
Listed copies:
Cambridge UL,
Oxford Bodley,
Quebec Laval UL (vell),
Besançon BM,
Paris BN ,
NO copies in the US.

“ Nothing is more beautiful than know all things”

622G Athansius Kircher 1602-1680

Ars Magna Sciendi, In XII Libros digesta. Qua Nova & Universali Methodo Per Artificiosum Combinationum contextum de omni re proposita plurimis & prope infinitis rationibus disputari, omniumque summaria quædam cognitio compari potest… (tomes 1&2)

Amsterdam: Apud Joannem Janssonium à Waesberge, & Viduam Elizei Weyerstraet, 1669 $11,500

Folio 14 ½ X 9 inches *4, **4, A-Z4, Aa-Gg4-Zz4, Aaa-Ooo4, Ppp6.
First edition. This copy is bound in full original calf with a gilt spine with an expertly executed early rebacking. The vovell sheets are present but not cut or placed. And two very large foldouts A complete copy with the usual browing.

Ars Magna Sciendi’ is Kircher’s exploration and development of the ‘Combinatoric Art’ of Raymond Lull, the thirteenth century philosopher. Kircher attempts in this monumental work to classify knowledge under the nine ideal attributes of God, which were taken to constitute the pattern for all creation. In the third chapter of this book is presented a new and universal version of the Llullistic method of combination of notions. Kircher seems to be convinced that the Llullistic art of combination is a secret and mystical matter, some kind of esoteric doctrine. In contrast with Llull, who used Latin words, words with clearly defined significations for his combinations, Kircher began filling the tables with signs and symbols of a different kind. By doing this Kircher was attempting to penetrate symbolic representation itself. (forming a ‘symbolic-Logic)
Kircher tried to calculate the possible combinations of all limited alphabets (not only graphical, but also mathematical). He considered himself a grand master of decipherment and tried to (and thought he did) translate Egyptian hieroglyphic texts, he felt that knowledge was a process of encoding and decoding. His tabula generalis, the more mathematical way of thinking created the great difference between Llull and Kircher.
Sommervogel 1066.28; Merrill 22; Ferguson I. 467; Brunet III, 666; Caillet II, 360.5771; Clendening 10.17; De Backer I, 429-30.23; Graesse IV, 21; Reilly #26.
957G Richard Mediavilla [Middleton], d. 1302/3

Commentum super quartem Sententarium..

Venice: Christophorus Arnoldus, [circa 1476-7] $22,000

Folio 12 ¼ 9 ¼ inches. a-z10 [et]10 [cum]10 [per]10 A 10 B-D8 (D8v blank and aa1r blank) aa8 bb10 cc8 {320 leaves complete}

Middleton’s Commentary on Peter Lombard’s ‘Sentences’ was probably begun in 1281 and was completed in 1284, when he became regent master of the Franciscan school in Paris, a post he held until 1287. The chief characteristic of his Commentary is its sober assessment of many of the positions of Thomas Aquinas. However, the tone of his eighty Quodlibet Questions, produced during his regency, is much more critical and on many issues shows a strong anti-Thomist reaction. In this they have more in common with his disputed questions, which were argued after the condemnations of 1277 but before his Sentences commentary. The latter commentary has been edited along with his Quodlibet Questions. A small number of his disputed questions have also been edited, as have six of his sermons.

Furthermore; nine questions (23 to 31) in this volume form a veritable treatise on demonology, a rare type in the thirteenth century. Mediavilla’s remark is singular: he is the only thinker who gives autonomy of existence to the demon, in the framework of a rational description.
Mediavilla focuses on the present of the devil and its modes of action on men. He is the great thinker of the demonic turn of the 1290s.
This text offers one of the origins of a Western genre, the “novel of Satan”
The questions of volume IV
23. Did the first sin of the angel come from a good principle?
24. Can the angel at the moment of his creation sin?
25 . In the first sin of the angel, was the comparison of the creature anterior, according to the order of nature, to the distancing from God?
26. Was the first sin of the angel pride?
27 . Did the evil angel repent of his pride?
28 . In the evil angels, does sin follow another sin without end?
29. Does the sorrow of the evil angels leave her with a certain joy?
30 . Would the evil angels not be?
31 . Can bad angels play our sensations?
See also Satan the Heretic: The Birth of Demonology in the Medieval West November 15, 2006 by Alain Boureau (Author), Teresa Lavender Fagan (Translator)

The ISTC shows two US copies
St Louis Univ., Pius XII Memorial Library (-)
Yale – i.e. both defective) add UCLA.
Goff M-424; BMC V 206.

904G Theophilus Metcalfe active 1649.

Manuscript copy of : Short-writing, the most easie, exact, lineal, and speedy method that hath ever been obtained, or taught. Composed by Theophilus Metcalfe, author and professor of the said art. The last edition. With a new table for shortning of words. Which book is able to make the practitioner perfect without a teacher. As many hundreds in this city and elsewhere, that are able to write sermons word for word, can from their own experience testifie.

England: after 1689 and before 1717 $5,500
Octavo 6 x 4 inches . 55, [7]pp. + portrait of author. The last section of 7 pp. contains Directions for Book-keeping after the Italian Method.
This manuscript is bound in full modern calf. This copybook manuscript is taken from the last edition published by Metcalfe. The entire work is done with remarkable calligraphy. This is a rare copy manuscript item with complementary addendum on Italian Book-Keeping.

Theophilus Metcalfe (bap. 1610 – c.1645) was an English stenographer.
He invented a shorthand system that became popular, in particular, in New England, where it was used to record the Salem witch trials.

Metcalfe was A professional writer and teacher of shorthand, Metcalfe in 1645 resided in the London parish of St Katharine’s by the Tower. He died that year or early in 1646, when his widow assigned rights to reissue the book of his system. Metcalfe published a stenographic system very much along the lines of Thomas Shelton’s Tachygraphy. The first edition of his work was entitled Radio-Stenography, or Short Writing and is supposed to have been published in 1635. A so-called sixth edition appeared at London in 1645. It was followed in 1649 by A Schoolmaster to Radio-Stenography, explaining all the Rules of the said Art, by way of Dialogue betwixt Master and Scholler, fitted to the weakest capacities that are desirous to learne this Art. Many editions of the system appeared under the title of Short Writing: the most easie, exact, lineall, and speedy Method that hath ever yet been obtained or taught by any in this Kingdome.
238J Peregrinus of Opole (1305-12, 1322-27) Jacobus de Voragine (1229-1298) & Nicolaus de Dinkelsbuel (1360-1433) Peregrinus: Sermones de tempore et de sanctis. Add: Jacobus de Voragine: Quadragesimale. Nicolaus de Dinkelsbuel: Concordantia in passionem dominicam

Est autem huius operis ordo talis. Primo ponuntur sermones d[omi]nicales de tempore per anni circulu[m]. Secundo de sanctis, Tercio q[ua]dragesimale Jacobi de Foragine, Q[ua]rto concordantia quatuor euangelista[rum] in passiiones d[omi]nicam a magistro Nicolao Dinckelspubell collectam.”/ At end of leaf m8: “Sermones Peregrini de tempore finiunt.

[Ulm: Johann Zainer, not after 1479] (A copy now in Munich BSB has an ownership inscription dated 1479) $19,000

Folio. “Pars I (188): a-d8, e-k8/6, l-m8, A-C8, D-I8/6, K-N8; (N8 blank and removed) “Pars II (50.): a-f8/6, g8;” 3.”Pars III (40.): A-E8/ [276 (instead of 278) The two blank leaves are missing. 162 & 188
¶ Peregrinus of Opole, was a Silesian Dominican friar, Prior in Wrocław and Racibórz and Provincial of the Polish-East German Order Province. “The numerous manuscripts and early prints testify to the popularity of his ‘Sermones de tempore et de sanctis'” (LThK VIII, 82). He was twice elected a provincial of his Order and became designated an inquisitor of Wrocław by the pope John XXII. His major literary achievement is this twofold collection of Latin sermons: Sermones de tempore (sermons on the feasts of the liturgical year) and Sermones de sanctis (sermons on feasts of particular saints).

¶ Jacobus de Voragine wrote several series of sermons, The Lenten sermons (Quadragesimale) were written between 1277 and 1286. These sermons were only slightly less popular than his “Legend,” and also known as ‘Golden’ on account of their popularity (there are more than 300 known manuscript copies). The genre of the Sermones quadragesimale did not exist as a distinct genre before the 1260’s This Dominican best-seller author Jacopo da Voragine, and the works of preachers from his own generation, like Peregrinus von Opeln [See above] have a strong sermo modernus structure and contain numerous exempla drawn from the world of nature.

¶Nicolaus de Dinkelsbuel. Magister in 1390, BUT The ascription of the Concordantia to Nicolaus de Dinkelsbühl (c 1360-1433) is mistaken. Although he is known as the author of a passion story ( Collecta et praedicata de passione Christi. 1472). he did not produce a concordance to it, But he is in fact listed as one of the authors cited in the work. (See A Madre, Nicolaus de Dinkelsbühl, Leben und Schriften, 1965, p 310.)
Only two North American copies, both defective.
Harvard University (- ff 189-278)
Bryn Mawr College, (ff 239-278)

Goff P267; HC 12581*; C 4407; IGI 7404; IBP 4241; Madsen 3083; Voull(B) 2629,5; Hubay(Augsburg) 1582; Hubay(Eichstätt) 794; Borm 2059; Walsh 909; Rhodes(Oxford Colleges) 1340; BMC II 529; BSB-Ink P-183; GW M30917 – Wegener, Zainer 9 – BSB-Ink P-183 – Proctor 2542 ISTC ip00267000
145J Paulus Pergulensis ca -1451.

Logica magistri Pauli Pergulensis.

Venice: Johannes Emericus, de Spira, 22 Feb. 1495/96 $12,500

Quarto. 10 x 8 ½ inches. a-e8, f4 (44 0f 44) leaves (complete)
Italy, the centre of humanism, produced the best logicians of the Renaissance. Paulus Pergulensis (d. 1451) was a pupil of Paul of Venice, author of the Logica magna and parva.. Introducing the theory of reference, sometimes called supposition, is an explanation of the ways in which words refer to objects in function of certain linguisitc signs.

Paul of Venice maintains a threefold division: Material Reference, Simple Reference, and Personal Reference, all of which are identified. The present is a more succinct and highly systematized logic, composed entirely in the form of theses.
From 1420 to 1454 Pergulensis taught logic and natural philosophy, and then also mathematics, astronomy and theology, to the Venetian school of Rialto (founded in 1408 ), to which he gave a real university organization. He was nominated ( 1448 ) bishop of Koper, which he renounced so as not to leave the teaching. We are left of him, manuscripts or press, some treatises of logic ( Dubia in consequentias Strodi , De sensu composite and divided , In regulas insolubilium , De scire et dubitare , Compendium logicae ), in which he discusses the new logical doctrines of the Oxford school in Padua by Paolo Veneto.

Paul of Pergula became the first publicly paid lecturer in philosophy in Venice, where he was officially honored in a public ceremony. In 1448, he was offered a bishopric, which he refused, and at the end of his life he accepted the administration of the Church of Saint John Almoner. He translated some works of Aristotle from Greek to Latin and was considered “on a par with the renowned Greek and Latin philosophers” (Brown, pp. vi-vii). Depending on the Logica Parva of Paul of Venice, De sensu composito et diviso should be regarded as a “mosaic of the treasury of logic known at the time” (Brown, p. viii).

Lohr, C.H. “A Note on Manuscripts of Paulus Venetus, Logica,” Manuscripta, 17(1973), pp. 35-36; reprinted in Bulletin de philosophie medievale, 15 (1973), pp. 145-146.

US Copies
Princeton Univ (2)
The Newberry Library
Goff P195; H 12626; R 1314; Sander 5476; IBE 4363; IGI 7322; IBPort 1357; Horch(Rio) Suppl 13; Mendes 957; GW Not in Copinger or British museum Catalogue of books printed in the XVth century
233J De Monte Rochen (active around 1330)

Manipulus Curatoru[m]; qui ſumme quilibet ſacerdoti eſt neceſſarius et nucliam virtutis animarum ipſaſq[ue] redimendas a purgatoꝛio & eterna dā[m]pnatione: quo modo ad beatitudine pertingi valeant in ſe continet: ſumma cum diligentia coꝛrectus.

Colophon¶ Liber qui manipulus curatoꝛum inſcribitur: editus a peritiſſimo viro domino Guidone de monte rocherij: vna cum tabula eiuſdem. Finit feliciter. Anno di Milleſimo quadringenteſimo nonageſimo ſeptimo. Die vero viceſimaquarto menſis Marcij.
Unassigned, 24 March 1497 [Lyons: Printer of Persius] $7,800

Octavo 5 ½ x 3 ¾ inches. a-s8t4. This copy is bound in modern vellum over boards with a tie.

This little guide on the sacrements for novice priests was written by the fourteenth century Spanish Theologian. No doubt that this small size was to accomidate the Priest who needed to carry with him. This also explains the scarcity, now while in the fifteenth century Bast estimates that sales of this maunel, were three times those of Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica. By the next century the Council of Trent and the creation of the Roman Catechism made this book obsolete in 1565. This edition is know in only three copies worldwide.

(Bast, Robert James (2000). Continuity and change: the harvest of late medieval and Reformation history: essays presented to Heiko A. Oberman on his 70th birthday. BRILL. p. 117. ISBN 978-90-04-11633-7.”)

CIBN differentiates a Printer of Guido de Monte Rochen from the Printer of Persius, who is there identified with Maillet (cf. CIBN S-334 and T-36) and GW identifiates tentatively the printer with Topié

Not in Goff; GW 11779; Kraus Cat. 182 no.125; IGI 4593 (& Tav. XVIII): CCIR G-73

Number of holding institutions 3
1) Italy Aosta Sem:
2) Romania Bucharest BN:
3) United States : Brown Univ.
252J. Timothy Rogers (1658-1728)
A discourse concerning trouble of mind and the disease of melancholly :
in three parts : written for the use of such as are, or have been exercised by the same subject.

London : Printed for Thomas Parkhurst, and Thomas Cockerill at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside, and at the Three Legs in the Poultrey 1691. $2, 800
Octavo 6 ½ x 4 inches. A8 a-d8 e4 B-2E8
“Rogers was educated at Glasgow University, where he matriculated in 1673, and then studied under Edward Veal at Wapping. Rogers began his career in the dissenting ministry as evening lecturer at Crosby Square, Bishopsgate. Some time after 1682 he was struck down by a form of hypochondria, from which he recovered in 1690, and then became assistant to John Shower. Shower was then minister of the Presbyterian congregation in Jewin Street, and moved in 1701 to the Old Jewry Meeting-house. Rogers’s hypochondria returned, and in 1707 he left the ministry .(DNB)

Rogers cautions not to blame the devil for this depression:

“Rogers’s detailed instructions on how to care for patients suffering from `trouble of mind’, especially from `melancholly’ of the religious kind, are particularly valuable because they were written from personal experience; as the extract shows much of his advice can still be usefully applied by the psychiatrist and the psychiatric nurse today.
In his late twenties he had his first breakdown, ‘a deep and settled melancholy’ lasting two years. On his recovery he wrote this book as an offering ‘for his wonderful restoration’, to discharge ‘the Duty of those Persons whom God hath delivered from Melancholy, and from the anguish of their Consciences’ and to show `What is to be thought of those that are distracted with Trouble for their sins’. However he continued ever after subject to ‘a very unhappy dejection of mind . . . a prey to gloomy fears and apprehensions’, so that he was forced to retire into the country where he continued to manifest ‘though in a more contracted sphere, the same zeal for the honour of God, and for the salvation of the souls of men’.” (300 years of Psychiatry, Richard Hunter, 1963, p248)

Wing; R1848; Hunter p248

Copies – N.America
Harvard University, Newberry, National Library of Medicine, Union Theological Seminary, William Andrews Clark
University of Texas at Austin, Yale University, Medical School.

235J Nicolaus Tygrinus or Tegrinus or Tegrini (1448-1527)

Lucensium Oratio Luculentissima Pont. Maximo Alexandro Sexto per Nicolaum Tygrinu[m] Lucensem Vtriusq]ue] Iuris.

[Rome], [Andreas Freitag ],15 October 1492 $5,900

Quarto, A4. 7¾ x 5 inches First Edition (see below). This copy is bound in later black roan & gray boards, spine letters gilt. The binding is slightly worn, and the first leaf is slightly soiled. Ex-libris Walter Goldwater.

O
ration such as this are usually rare and short this one is both it is a tribute from the City of Lucca to the election of Pope Alexander VI. This is one of three almost simultaneously published prints of this on October 25, 1492 before the newly elected Borgia Pope Alexander VI. held this speech. – “”This was the typical ‘Oratio’ – in the style of the times, both florid and unctous – which extolled the virtues of the Pope, traits which subsequent events failed to confirm!”” (Bühler) According to Bühler’s study, The Freitag printing was preceded by the editions of Stephan Planck (in Roman type) , whose corrections Freitag employed in his edition.”

CF Bühler, The Earliest Editions of the “”Oratio”” (1492) by Nicolaus Tygrinus (in: Gutenberg JB 1975, pp. 97-99)”
United States of America
Walters Art Museum Library
Bryn Mawr College,
Library of Congress,
New York, Columbia
Huntington Library
Southern Methodist Univ
Yale
Goff T563; HC 15751*; Pell Ms 10972; CIBN T-51; Nice 209; IGI 9670; IBE 5542; BMC IV 137;

246J Gerardus de Zutphania (1367-1398)

[ De spiritualibus ascensionibus.] Tractatus de spiritualibus ascensionibus Add: David de Augusta: De exterioris et interioris hominis compositione Lib. II, 1 (De quatuor in quibus incipientes deo servire debent esse cauti)

[Basel : Johann Amerbach and Johann Petri de Langendorff, not after 1489]. $13,000
OCTAVO a-h8 i4./67 of 68 leaves. Lacking a1 title. Rubricated in red, initials painted in red, blue and green. Contemporary binding in full calf, with blind tooling, spine slightly rubbed Final page blank.

Even in the Brothers of the Common Life’s community of “plain living and high thinking” Gerard ZERBOLT was remarkable for his absorption in the sacred sciences and his utter oblivion of all matters of merely earthly interest. He held the office of librarian, and his deep learning in moral theology and canon law did the brothers good service, in helping them to meet the prejudice and opposition which their manner of life at first aroused. In Radewijns’ absence, Zerbolt assumed his responsibilities as rector.

This is the inaugural treatise by Gerard Zerbolt of Zütphen, described by Post (in “The Modern Devotion”) as “the most fertile and the most successful writer the Brothers [of the Common Life] ever produced.” Zerbolt was an early member of the “Devotio Moderna” and served as librarian to the Brethren of the Common Life in Deventer. Despite his lack of university training, he “was remarkable for his absorption in the sacred sciences and his utter oblivion of all matters of merely earthly interest.” (Cath. Ency.) Here, Zerbolt outlines how one can redeem the soul from its fallen state, moving to higher and higher levels through “self-knowledge, repentance, combat of sin, mortification, the practice of humility and obedience.” (Post)

U. S. COPIES
Boston Public Library
Bryn Mawr College,
Free Library of Philadelphia
Library of Congress, Ohio State
Huntington Library (2)
The Newberry Library
Univ. of HoustonYale University, (2)
Goff G177; ISTC,; ig00177000; Oates,; 2803; Bod-inc,; G-081; Pr,; 7638; BMC,; III:752; BSB-Ink,; G-127; GW,; 10689
189J Anonymous; attributed to George Joye

Our sauiour Iesus Christ hath not ouercharged his chirche with many ceremonies.

[At Zijrik] [i.e. Antwerp : Widow of C. Ruremond?], M.D.XLIII. in Febru. [1543] $9,000

Octavo, First and only edition A-B8 C6 .
Like Coverdale, Joye was probably also employed in the printing business as proofreader, translator, and author of religious books.
His first, now lost publication was a Primer, the first Protestant devotional book ever published in English. Based on contemporary accounts, it probably contained the translation of the seven penitential psalms, “Mattens and Euensong” with the Commendations (Psalm 119. The book was criticized by Thomas More for omitting the Litany of the Saints, the hymns and anthems to the Blessed Virgin, and the Dirge.
After the publication of his Primer, containing perhaps as many as thirty psalms, Joye set out to translate the rest of the Book of Psalms, which appeared in 1530. Joye used Martin Bucer’s recent Latin translation of the Hebrew text, which was published under the pseudonym Aretius Felinus. In the same year Joye produced a revised version of his earlier primer with the title Ortolus animae. The garden of the soule. In 1531, Joye’s translation of the Book of Isaiah appeared, which seems to have been intended as a twin volume to Tyndale’s translation of the Book of Jonah. In 1531 Joye also published a defence countering the charges of heresy put against him by Ashwell in 1527.
Butterworth and Chester suggest that Joye published the translations of the Book of Proverbs and of Ecclesiastes in 1533 in Antwerp, of which only later London reprints have survived. It is now also believed that Joye is the author of an anonymously published treatise entitled The Souper of the Lorde, which was earlier attributed to Tyndale. In this Joye described his position on the Eucharist, based on that of Zwingli. Joye’s translation of the Book of Jeremiah, of Lamentations, and a new translation of the Psalter followed (this time from the Latin Psalter of Zwingli, whose Latin commentaries and translations had also served as source texts for Joye’s translations of the other books of the Old Testament). All these translations were the first of these books ever printed in English. In 1534 Joye undertook the proofreading of Tyndale’s New Testament edition that had been reprinted three times without any English-speaking corrector by the Flemish printing firm of the family Van Ruremund. Joye, however, not only corrected the typographical errors, but he also changed the term “resurreccion” as found in Tyndale’s text by expressions such as “the lyfe after this” in some twenty occurrences of the word.[14] Joye believed, as he later explained, that the original term in the Bible in those places did not refer to the bodily resurrection but to the intermediate stateof the soul.[15] At the same time, Joye retained Tyndale’s original formulation at the some 150 other occurrences of the word, where he agreed with Tyndale that the term did refer to the bodily resurrection.[16] Tyndale reacted by bringing out his own revised version of his New Testament in November 1534, in which he inserted a second foreword attacking Joye and his editorial work. Tyndale accused Joye of promoting the heresy of the denial of the bodily resurrection and causing divisions among Protestants. After an inconclusive attempt to reconcile the parties, Joye published an apology to refute Tyndale’s accusations in February 1535.

STC (2nd ed.), 14556 Copies N.America
Folger ,Pierpont Morgan Library , University of Illinois
188J New Testament [Estienne, Robert.]

Τῆς Καινῆς Διαθήκης άπαντα Nouum Iesu Christi D.N. Testamentum. Ex Bibliotheca Regia.
[Paris]: Roberti Stephani Regiis typis, 1550. $18,000
Folio *8, **8, a-q8, r6; A-M8, N6. Bound in 17th century paneled calf, rebacked.

“This is universally recognized as the best-known and most influential of Robert Estienne’s works. Renouard went so far as to say that this volume alone would have sufficed to establish Robert Estienne’s reputation as scholar and printer. However, of all Robert Estienne’s publications, it is also the one most directly responsible for his departure to Geneva, following his final clash with the theologians of the Sorbonne, who saw in Estienne’s marginal variant readings an instance of the most brazen heresy.

“The volume is of great typographical importance as well, since it marks the first use of all three fonts of “grecs du roi”-the third and largest size was used here for the first time.
“on leaf **7 appears a long 72-line Greek poem, composed in Homeric idiom and meter, by Robert Estienne’s teen-age son, Henri; these verses (later reprinted in Henri’s own Greek Testaments) may represent his earliest published work. (Quoted from Schreiber’s catalogue, “The Estiennes” p. 97).
Adams B-1661; Schreiber, The Estiennes, 105; Darlow & Moule 4622. pp. 587-8. Cf. also: Scrivener-Miller, Introduction, i, p. 124, n.3 and ii, pp. 190-1; Ellis, Bentleii Critica Sacra, pp. xiv-xv; Hoskier, Full Account, passim. Mortimer I, # 78; Renouard p. 75, #1; Scholderer, Greek Printing Types, p.10.
226J New Testament.

The Nevv Testament of Iesus Christ, translated faithfully into English, out of the authentical Latin, according to the best corrected copies of the same, diligently conferred vvith the Greeke and other editions in diuers languages; vvith arguments of bookes and chapters, annotations, and other necessarie helpes, for the better vnderstanding of the text, and specially for the discouerie of the corruptions of diuers late translations, and for cleering the controversies in religion, of these daies: in the English College of Rhemes.

Printed at Rhemes : By Iohn Fogny, 1582. $45,000

Quarto 218 x 165 mm a-c4, d2, A-Z4, Aa-Zz4, Aaa-Zzz4, Aaaa-Zzzz4, Aaaaa-Ddddd4, Eeeeee2.

The First Catholic New Testament in English This copy is bound in seventeenth-century calf, sympathetically rebacked, with an attractive gold-tooled floral motif to the board edges. Internally, this copy is in very good condition with clean leaves. There is a little foxing to the first two leaves and a few trivial marginal tears. The upper margin is cut a bit close but the text is never affected.

“The ‘editio princeps’ of the Roman Catholic version of the New Testament in English. Translated from the Vulgate by Gregory Martin, under the supervision of William Allen and Richard Bristow. According to the “Douai Diaries”, Martin began the translation in October1578 and completed it in March 1582.

“The translation adheres very closely to the Latin, though it shows traces of careful comparison with the Greek. But its groundwork was practically supplied by the existing English versions, from which Martin did not hesitate t borrow freely. In particular there are very many striking resemblances between Martin’s renderings and those in Coverdale’s diglot of 1538. Martin’s own style is often disfigured by Latinisms.
“This Rheims New Testament exerted a very considerable influence on the King James version of 1611, transmitting to it not only an extensive vocabulary, but also numerous distinctive phrases and turns of expression. (See J.G. Carleton’s exhaustive analysis, The Part of Rheims in the Making of the English Bible. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1902.)

Pforzheimer, 68; Darlow & Moule 231; STC (2nd ed.), 2884; Herbert 177; Pierpont Morgan Library, The Bible 115; The Bible 100 Landmarks, 66; Bible in the Lilly Library 40.
200J Bible Hebrew Robert Stephanus I. (1503-1559

Biblia hebraica cum punctis [v. 1] Hamishah humshe Torah = Quinque libri legis. 1543.– [v. 2] Neviim rishonim = Prophetae priores. 1544.– Divre ha-yamim = Liber Paralipomenon. 1543.– [v. 3] Sefer Yesha`yah = Prophetia Isaiae. 1539.– Sefer Yirmeyahu = Prophetia Ieremiae. 1540.– Sefer Yehezkel = Ezechiel. 1542.– Sefer Iyov = Iob. 1541. [v. 4] Sefer Tere `asar = Duodecim Prophetae. 1539.– [v. 5] Sefer Tehilim = Psalterium. 1540.– Hamesh megilot = Canticum canticorum, Ruth, Lamentationes, Ieremiae, Ecclesiastes, & Ester. 1540. — [v. 6] Sefer Mishle = Prouerbia Salomonis. 1540.– [v. 7] Sefer Daniyel = Daniel. 1540.– [v. 8] Sefer Ezra = Esdras. 1541.

Parisiis : Ex officina Roberti Stephani, typographi regii,1539-1544 $25,000

Quarto Title from Renouard, Annales de l’imprimerie des Estienne] Robert Stephens’s first edition (Paris, 1539-44, 4 vols.). This was not published as a whole, but in parts, each having a title. The first part that was published was ישעיה ספר, or Prophetia Isaice (ibid. 1539). Of variations, we subjoin the following: 1, 25,!סיגי; ve. 29, מאלים 3:16, וּמשִׁקרוֹת 6:5, נדמתי; 8:6, השלּח (dagesh in ל); ren. 13, מערצכם; 10:15, ואת ver. 16, כבודו; ver. 18, כמסום; ver. 33, ישפרו, etc. The second part contained the twelve minor prophets (1539); the third, the Psalms (1540); the fourth, the Proverbs (1540); in the same year also Jeremiah, Daniel, the five Megilloth; in 1541, Job, Ezra, Ezekiel; in 1543, Chronicles, the former prophets, and the Pentateuch.
Adams; B-1221; BM STC France, 1470-1600,; p. 56; Darlow & Moule,; 5089, note; Armstrong, E. Robert Estienne (1954),; p. 32-33

187J Thomas Cranmer (1489-1556)

A Defence of The True and Catholike doctrine of the sacrament of the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ, with a confutation of sundry errors concernyng the same, grounded and stablished vpon Goddes holy woorde, & approued by ye consent of the moste auncient doctors of the Churche. Made by the moste Reuerende father in God Thomas Archebyshop of Canterbury, Primate of all Englande and Metropolitane.

Imprynted at London : in Paules Churcheyard, at the signe of the Brasen serpent, by Reynold Wolfe. Cum priuilegio ad imprimendum solum, anno Domini. M. D. L. [1550]

Quarto: *4, A-Z4, Aa-Gg4 $28,000
This copy is bound in contemporary, blind-stamped English calf with small medallion portrait rolls. The boards are composed of printer’s waste taken from John Bale’s ” Illustrium Maioris Britanniae Scriptorum” of 1548. The text block is backed with vellum manuscript fragments. Both the binding and the text are in strictly original condition.

In Cranmer’s response to Gardiner, “A Defence of the True and Catholike doctrine of the sacrament of the body and bloud of our sauiour Christ”, the archbishop offers a semi-official explanation of the Eucharistic theology that lay at the heart of his Prayer Book.
STC 6002 (with catchwords B4r “des”, S1r “before”.) Title page border: McKerrow & Ferguson 73; Printer’s device: McKerrow 119. References: Diarmaid MacCulloch, “Thomas Cranmer, A Life”; G.W. Broniley, “Thomas Cranmer, Theologian”.)
186J Desiderius Erasmus von Rotterdam (1466-1538)
The First Tome (and second) or Volume of the Paraphrase of Erasmus upon the newe testament.
Enpriented at London in fletestete at the signe of the sunne by Edwarde Whitchurche, the last daie of Januarie, 1548. $38,000

Two Small Folio volumes 7.6 x 10.75 in. First edition. Vol I: ( )6, (:)6, A-Q6, R4, (:)6, Aa6, B-O6 (leaf O6 blank and present), ¶6, (::)6, a-z6, aa-dd6, ee8, A-R6, S8, A-N6, O4 [lacking final leaf O4]. 565 leaves. “O4 is missing in all the copies examined, but it may be assumed that the recto is blank and the verso contains device McKerrow 107.” –Devereux.
Vol II: †6, ††6, ¶4, A-G6, H2, Aa-Ff6, Gg8, Hh-Kk6, Ll4, aa-cc6, dd4 (dd4 blank and present), ¶6 (¶6 blank and present), AA-BB6, CC4 (CC4 blank and present), AAa6, BBb4, aaaa6, bbbb4, AAAa-BBBb6 (BBBb6 blank and present), AAAA-EEEE6, FFFF4, AAAAa-DDDDd6, EEEEe4 (EEEEe4 blank and present), *2, ¶-¶H6, ¶I8, ¶¶A-¶¶F6, ¶¶G4. 362 leaves
Complete copies of these volumes are rare; complete “sets” extremely so. The “First Tome” and “Seconde Tome” are independent publications. Copies of the “First Tome”, which bear the generic date of January 1548 (“The date itself seems to be 1548, not 1548/9; copies were bought before the autumn of 1548”-Devereux). The “second Tome” was not begun until the autumn of 1548 and did not appear in print until 1549, with the date of August 16. Thus, few “sets” exist as such.
“The impact of Erasmus’ ‘Paraphrases’ was enormous. Like his edition of the Greek New Testament and his ‘Annotations’, the ‘Paraphrases’ made the Bible increasingly more accessible to ordinary people. In his dedicatory epistle to the paraphrase on Mark, Erasmus expresses satisfaction at seeing ‘Christian literature, and especially the New Testament, studied so eagerly by everyone, even laymen in private station, that professional experts in the Scriptures are quite often worsted by them in debate.’”(Erika Rummel)

STC 2854; Devereux’s first checklist C67.5; Devereux 26.4.5; II. STC 2866; Devereux’s first checklist C68.1; Devereux 26.5.1. See also: Darlow and Moule 73; E.J. Devereux, “English Translations of Erasmus 1522-1557”. For the bindings: Oldham, “English Blind-stamped Bindings”, p. 50 and Plate XLVI (#753 HE c (1)).

261J Marcus Tullius Cicero edited by Jacques-Louis Strébée ( 1480-1550)

M. Tullii Ciceronis ad M. Brutum oratorJacobi Lodoici Strebaei commentariis ab authore ipso recognitis illustratus.

Parisiis : ex officina Michaëlis. Vascosani, 1540 $4,200

Small Folio 8 X 6 1/2 inches . *6, A-08, P4, Q6 complete ([12], 224, [20])
Bound in modern carta rustic ,recently resewin on three leather cords It is bound in the style of mid-sixteenth century, thinner cartonnage with turn-ins to stabilize the edges of the cover. This is a very solid and stable copy, ready to be researched with, despite the water staining.

This copy has Extensive sixteenth-century MS marginal and interlineal annotations, underlinings etc., throughout; in Latin. There is inter linear notes on every section of Cicero’s text but very few notes on Strébée’s commentary.

Of the 224 pages, about 150 have notes in a small and sometimes very faint sixteenth century hand. On the Printed title there is quite a bit of pen-starts and doodles as well as faint ownership signatures . ( There is a copy in the University of Manchester Library UML copy at R229539, which is catalogued as having extensive notes as well.)
Before the Printed text the annotator has written an “Argumentum”
175J Martin Luther (1483-1546)

Ein Brieff D.M. Luther Wider die Sabbather : an einen guten Freund.

Wittemberg , 1538 $6,000
[Nickel Schirlenz]

Quarto, 6 ¾ x 5 inches A4-D4. This copy is bound in limp manscript vellum wrapper. From a 14th century Breviarium, forming a semi wallet.

This treatise was published by Luther in the form of an open letter. This is a responce to Luthers friend Graff Wolfgang Schlick. This Anti-Jewish polemic was to refute those who argued that Christians ought to observe practices of God’s covenant with Israel (the Old Testament, or Judaism) that Christians historically either had set aside or had changed with the coming of Christ, but which the Jewish people had continued to practice. One of these Old Testament practices, to observe the Sabbath on Saturday (rather than on Sunday, as Christians had done historically), gave rise to the name that Luther uses for his opponents: “the Sabbatarians.” In Part One of the work, Luther argues that God’s covenant with Israel, also called the Law of Moses, is not in force for
 Christians. Yet he goes on below to say that those parts of the Ten Commandments that are based on the universal moral law remain in force for everyone because that law preceded the Law of Moses.

Benzing 2394
197J Martin Luther (1483-1546)

Vrsach vnd antwort. das Junckfrawen. Kloster. Götlich verlassen mügen.

Augsburg : Heinrich von Steiner 1523 $5,000

Quarto 6 ¾ x 5 ½ inches. A4,B2 . Bound in 19th century boards.
This is a rare edition of the famous writing in which Luther verifies the asceticism of the church. The offense to this writing was the liberation of some nuns by Leonh.
The names of these nuns are mentioned at the end; among them also Luther’s later wife Katharina Bora.
VD16 L 6882; Benzing. Lutherbibliographie; 1989, 1565; |B|Luther: WA T,; 11, 389; Druck E; |B|Kratzsch: Verzeichnis der Lutherdrucke, Nr.; 453; Kuzynski 3299.
171J Ulrich Zwingli (1484-1531)

Qvo pacto ingenvi adolescentes forma[n]di sint, praeceptiones pauculae, Huldricho Zuinglio autore.
Basileae : Apud Joannem Bebelium,1523 $12,800

Octavo 6 x 4 inches.[12] f. ; 8° A8, B4. The very rare, First Edition, bound in manuscript vellum with a long tie.
This Book has been referred to by W. Boyd in his History of western Education 1964, as :
“ The first book to be written on education from a Protestant point of: view”
“Whereas critics deem it a loose collection of personal observations about raising teenagers, the treatise in fact contains a clear summary of the biblical principles supporting Christian education. More precisely, it is one of the first treatises to discuss nurture of the young from an explicitly Reformed point of view. And “On the Education of the Youth” makes an eloquent case for the role of education in developing the moral as well as intellectual qualities of the young. Zwingli makes observations about the basis of Reformed instruction, the formation of an upright moral character, and the service to others that should result from proper nurture.” … Zwingli states that the object of learning is the universe and all that it contains. As the created order, the universe is subservient to the Creator. When we study the elements that make up the universe, “we learn that all these things are changing and destructible, but that he who conjoined them … is necessarily unchanging and immutable (104).” Thus the very things studied by humans reveal that there is someone superior to them and their learning, namely God. As human creatures fashioned by the eternal, omnipotent God, mortals should be humbled rather than exalted in their learning. In studying things brought into existence by the word of God, we are “taught that all things are ordained by the providence of God (104).” Wisdom is not to be sought in human philosophies, for they are as mortal and fallible as the people who conceive them. Rather, since all the objects of human enquiry are in the hands of God, “if we desire wisdom or learning, we are taught to ask it of Him alone (105)” and to seek it in His infallible Word. (Huldrych Zwingli on Reformed Instruction) – Dr. R. Faber Taken With permission from Clarion Vol. 48, No. 1 (1999). VD 16, Z-855

275J James Ferrand

Εροτομανια Or A Treatise Discoursing of the Essence, Causes, Symptomes, Prognosticks, and Cure of Love, or EROTIQUE MELANCHOLY.

Oxford: by L. Lichfield to be sold by Edward Forrest, 1640. $6,900

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: