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 French and  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

Hardouyn Heures on vellum!

N.

Heures a lusaige de Romme tout au long sans riens requerir : avec les figures de la vie de lhomme: et la destruction de hierusa=lem.

Tout pour le Mieulx.

747915

Paris : Par Gillet Hardouyn imprimeur, 1509     $Sold

Large Quarto 9 x 5 3/4   inches (a very Large copy)  [92] Vellum leaves A-L8, M4  complete.

Printed in red and black. 21 full -page Illustrations,  and 28 small woodcuts along the text, from the Master of the Apocalypse Rose, and IMG_0336Pichore design. All the borders are painted . ILLUMINATED IN GOLD AND  very vivid COLOURS BY A CONTEMPORARY HAND, liquid-gold initials and line-filler the illustrations are mostly of Gospel scenes; numerous small illustrations of saints and miscellaneous subjects; each text page within varying historiated border. One- and two-line initials in gold on blue or red ground throughout. The imagery in this book combines metalcut designs by Jean Pichore with the rich illumination of a painter.

Large R (for Rome) on first four leaves of each quire, in a line with the signature.

This copy is bound in 18thcentury tan calf recently rebacked.

IMG_0316
HARDOUYN (Gilles or Gillet), son of Guillaume, born in 1455, libr. – juror and printer, 1491-1521; resigns his duties as a free juror on 9 Sept. 1519. He was first a bookseller and IMG_0319then also a typographer, he was, together with Germain Hardouyn, one does not know if his son or brother, among the first to introduce in the decoration of the Livres d’heures the style of the Italian Renaissance.   He published exclusively books of hours. Before the fall of Pont-Notre-Dame (25 Oct. 1499), he lives in the 8th house of the bridge. Then He can be found: – “At the end of the bridge at the Change, at the sign of the Rose, below the beautiful Ymaige; – On the bridge at the Change near the beautiful Ymaige Notre Dame at the sign of the Rose “; At this location he is listed as  was only bookseller. And almost IMG_0331every Hours that bears this address have the name of another printer than him. In 1509, he became a printer and established himself: – “At the end of the bridge Notre Dame before saints Denis de la Chartre at the sign of the Rose dor; – In confinio pontis Nostræ Dominæ, ante ecclesiam sancti Dionisii of carcere, ad intersignum Rosæ deauratæ; Several books of hours bearing this address and his name as imprint. With an almanac beginning earlier, are not earlier than 1509. He keeps this address until the end .

Documents: Arch. Nat., ZIH 24, 364; L. DOREZ, Notes … n ° 11; P. LACOMBE, Books of Hours, Passim. We admit here with Leon Dorez, that the libr.-juror who resigns his office in 1519 and who is called Gilbert is the same as Gillet; however it is qualified factor , which seems to apply with difficulty to a printer having produced as much as him. – The ancestors of the Hardouyn had always lived and “exposed their days” on the bridge Notre Dame. 

IMG_0325Sig. A1r (Hercules and the centaur Nessus* ), a1v almanac for 1508-20, a2r-7r calendar, a7v-B1v Gospel sequence [Martyrdom of St. John, two portrait cuts], B2r-6r Passion according to St. John [Crucifixion], B6r-7r Obsecro te, B7v-c8r Hours of the Virgin: Matins-Lauds [Adam and Eve, Annunciation, Visitation], C8v-F2r Hours of the Cross and of the Holy Ghost, intermingled with Hours of the Virgin: Prime-Compline [Flagellation, Pentecost, Nativity, Annunciation to the Shepherds, Adoration of the Magi (x 2), Flight into Egypt, Coronation of the Virgin], F2v-3v prayers for saying on weekdays, F4r-8r prayers for saying on Saturday and others, F8v- G5r Seven Penitential Psalms [a Prophet, David],IMG_0332 G5r-8r Litany of Saints, G8v-I6v Office of the Dead [a Prophet, Job on his Dungheap], I7r-8v prayers to the Virgin and to St. John the Evangelist, I8v-K5v suffrages, K5v-7v prayers to the Virgin, Missus est Gabriel, K8r-L3v seven prayers to St Gregory, Seven joys of the Virgin, and other prayers in Latin and French, L4r contents, L4v colophon, M1-6 Office of the Immaculate Conception).M4 Prayer: Jesus soit en ma teste; M4v colophon..

Full page woodcuts:
A1 Hardouin Device, the Centaurus Nessus, Heracles and the abduction of Deianira;
A1v Planetary man, in the form of a Skeleton;
A6 Martyrdom of Johannes the Evangelist, in the cauldron of boiling oil;

IMG_0346
A8v Impotence of the soldiers in the capture of Christ in Gethsemane-Ego Sum;
B4v Divine Decree, the Church and the virtues;
B5 Annunciation;
C3v The meeting of Joachim and Anna at the Golden Gate;
C8V Flagellation of Christ;
D1 Crucifixion;

IMG_0313
D2 Pentecost;
D3 Nativity;
D5v Annunciation to the Shepherds;

747915_view 02_02-2

D6 Nativity (from Simone Vostre Quart Series);
E1 Adoration of the Magi;
E3v Presentation in the Temple;
E6 Massacre of the Innocents;

IMG_0323
F1v Death of the Virgin;

IMG_0345
F8v battle and Death of Uriah;

747915_view 03_03
G1 King David and Bathsheba bathing;
G8v The poor Lazarus at the banquet of the rich, “Lazarus and Dives”;
H1 Massacre of the Innocents (Repeated);
L 8v Mary Immaculate;
M4v Hardouin Device.

Small Woodcuts:
A7, San Luca Evangelist in the Scriptorium;
A7v, San Matthew Evangelist in the Scriptorium;
A7v, San Mark Evangelist in the Scriptorium;
C8, Sanhedrin trial of Jesus;
I8 Man of Sorrows on a sarcophagus;
I8v Man of Sorrows on a sarcophagus (repeated);
I8v miracle of Pentecost;
K1v Annunciation;
K4v Archangel Michael as a conqueror of the Satan;
K4v Beheading of John the Baptist;IMG_0329
K5 John the evangelist with the cup of poison;
K5 decapitation of the Apostle Peter;
K5v St. James at pilgrimage with book;
K6 Martyrdom of St. Stephen standing with book and stones;
K6 St. Lawrence on the grill;
K6 St. Christopher carrying the Christ;
K6V Martyrdom of St. Sebastian;
K7v St. Nicholas with the three boys;
K7v St. Claudius as a bishop with book;
K8 St. Anthony as a hermit with his pig;
K8 St. Anne teaches Maria to read;
K8v St. Mary Magdalene standing with the Ampulla;
K8V St. Catherine with wheel, sword and book;
L1 St. Margaret escaping from the Satan, in the shape of a dragon;
L1 St. Barbara standing with tower and palm branch;
L1v Beheading of St. Barbara;
L3 Crucifixion with Mary and John;
L6 Annunciation to Mary. The words on the fourth line of the colophon and the entire 3 lines below that obliterated. Contemporary owner’s motto and arms painted in colors and gold on vellum leaves at beginning and end; early 19th-century booklabel of Bettison’s of Cheltenham & Leamington; 19th-century armorial bookplate of George Folliot.IMG_0340

In these Hardouyn Hours the metal cuts are emulating those of “Vostre”s new style of illustration”(see the next item in this catalogue).

IMG_0363

Bohatta 887, 891, ; Brun, pages 18 and 210 (“la meilleure production des presses d”Hardouyn”); Fairfax Murray/French 270; Lacombe 199. Brunet, Manuel , V, Paris 1864, coll. 1628-1644; Ph. Renouard, Imprimeurs Parisiens , etc., Paris 1898; P. Lacombe, Livres d’heures etc., Paris 1907; Bohatta, Bibliographie des livres d’heures .Vienna 1909; R. Brun, Le livre illustré en France au XVI and siècle , Paris 1930, pp. 22-26.
  1. Newberry Library IMG_0365

2.Huntington Library,

3.Morgan Library & Museum

4.University of British. Columbia

5.University of Cambridge

  1. 6 Koninklijike Bibliotheek

747915_view 04_04

Nessus is well known for his part in the story of the Shirt of Nessus. He was a ferryman, and one day, he had to carry Deianeira, wife of Heracules, across the river. After they crossed the river, Nessus tried to have sex with her, but Hercules watching from the other riverbank, shot an arrow straight into Nessus’ chest. Before he drew his final breath, Nessus told Deianeira that his blood would ensure that her husband would be faithful to her in eternity. Deianeira believed him and collected some of the centaur’s blood.

(E.B.)

IMG_0344

Very Rare Boethius Incunabulum

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)

DSC_0003

[Lyons: Guillaume Le Roy], 1487                                                       $16,000

DSC_0002Folio 9 1/2 X 6 3/4 inches 235 leaves. Sig. 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, lacking ONLY three blanks: x6, A1, and I8; This copy is bound in modern calf over wooden boards. It is a nice clean copy.

Text surrounded by commentary ascribed to Thomas Aquinas, with a second work attributed to Pseudo-Boethius, De Disciplina Scholarium, with commentary of Pseudo-Aquinas; contemporary annotations, cropped, Bound in quarter calf over wooden boards.

DSC_0005

“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”

 

DSC_0006

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.

DSC_0004

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 French and  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)

 

Manuscript Postilla of Nicholas deLyra

635G de Lyra, Nicolas. 1270-1340

Postilla super Actus Apostolorum, Epistolas Canonicales et Apocalypism.

The codex begins

Incipit praefatio sancti Hieronymi pr-bti De corpore epist bean Pauli apopot..

Untitled 6

Folio, 11 3/4 X 7 3/4. Manuscript on Paper 386 leaves, ca 1460 in several hands (see below),      This copy is bound in later full vellum.          $65,000

The Postillae constitute theUntitled 9
first Christian Bible
commentary to be printed.
The literalist approach led
Nicholas to *Rashi, whom he
often cites by name
(Salomo). In this he had been
anticipated by the Victorine
scholars, especially by
*Andrew of Saint Victor
whom he quotes (G.Calandra, De… Andreae Victorini… in Ecclesiasten (1948), 83–85). However, Nicholas, who records his perusal of a controversial tract hebraice scriptus (“written in Hebrew”; see Hailperin in bibl., p. 140), used Rashi directly as well. In addition he read some rabbinic material in Raymond *Martini’s Pugio Fidei. Soon after his death, Nicholas’ Postillae were available in virtually every library in western Christendom. Nicholas had abiding influence (Hailperin, p. 282f.). Wycliffe acknowledged his indebtedness to Nicholas in his (later) English version of the Bible (c. 1388). *Luther was particularly dependent on him, especially on Genesis. In his commentary to Daniel, Abrabanel controverts Nicholas’ christological exegesis.

[A full physical of the hands and decorative initals are available on request]

Thus begins the Pauline epistles :(two columns) fol 6 Romans
fol 19 first Corinthians
fol 31 second Corinthians

fol 39 Galations fol 43 Ephesians fol 47 Philippians fol 50 Colossians

fol 54 Laodocians
fol 53 first Thessalonians DSC_0079 2
fol 56 second Thessalonians
fol 57 first Timothy
fol 60 second Timothy
fol 63 Titus
fol 64 Philemon
fol 65-80 Hebrews
fol 80-97 John revelation( Apokalypse)
fol 98 James Apocalypse
fol 100 first Peter Apocalypse
fol 106 first-third John
fol 109 Jude
fol 111 preface to Acts
fol 113 Acts fol 146 ( new hand / single column)fol 146-170 (at 162 text switches to two columns [ Same hand]Postill (de Lyra?) Sup explanm Romans
fol 170-242 Paul vocatus Apls’- thessalonians
fol 242 Paul Secundum
fol 288 Quatuor
fol 353 Explicit postilla Apocalypum.fol 353 Incipit Postilla of Nicolai de Lyra sup apocalipsum-
fol 383 -Explicit Postilla of Nicolai de Lyra sup apocalipsum (End )

Nicholas was born at Lyra in Normandy 1270 and he died in Paris in 1340. The report that he was of Jewish descent dates only from the fifteenth century. He took the Untitled 8Franciscan habit at Verneuil, studied theology, received the doctor’s degree in Paris and was appointed professor at the Sorbonne. In the famous controversy on the Beatific vision he took sides withe the professors against John XXII. He laboured very successfully both in preaching and writing, for the conversion fo the Jews. He is the author of numerous theological works, some of which are yet unpublished. It was to exegesis that Nicholas of Lyra devoted his best years. In his second prologue to his monumental work “Postilla perpetu in universam S. Scripturam” after stating that the literal sense of Sacred Scriptureis the foundation of all mystical expositions, and that it alone has demonstrative force, as St. Augustine teaches, he deplores the state of Biblical studies in his time. The literal sense, he avers, is much obscured, owing partly to the unskilfulness of some of he correctors, and partly also to our own translation (the Vulgate) which not infrequently departs form the original Hebrew. He holds with St. Jerome that the text must be corrected from the Hebrew codices, except of course the prophecies concerning the Divinity of Christ. Another reason for this obscurity, Nicholas goes on to say, is the attachment of scholars to the method of interpretation handed down by others, who, though they have said many things well, have yet touched sparingly on the literal sense, and have so multiplied the mystical senses as nearly to choke it. Moreover, the text has been distorted by a multiplicity of arbitrary divisions and concordances. Hereupon he declares his intention of insisting, in the present work, upon the literal sense and

of interspersing only a few mystical interpretations. Nicholas utilized all available sources, fully mastered the Hebrew and drew copiously from the valuable commentaries of the Jewish exegetes, especially of the celebrated Talmudist Russia (Rashi).
“The Pugio Fidei” of Raymond Martini and the commentaries of St. Thomas Aquinas were also influences. His (Nicholas de Lyra) is lucid and concise; his observations are are judicious and sound, and always original. The Postilla soon became the favourite manual of exegesis. The solid learning of Nicholas commanded the respect of both Jews and Christians.

Untitled 7Luther owes much to Nicholas of Lyra, but how widely the principles of Nicholas differed essentially from Luther’s views is best seen from Nicholas’s own words:

“ I protest that I do not intend to assert or determine anything that has not been manifestly determined by Sacred Scripture or by the authority of the Church.. Wherefore I submit all I have said or shall say to the correction of Holy Mother Church and of all the learned men.’.
(Prol. secund in Postillas…)

Nicholas taught no new doctrine. The early Fathers and the great schoolman had repeatedly laid down the same sound exegetical principles, but owing to adverse tendencies of the

times, their efforts had partly failed. Nicholas carried out these principles effectively, and in this lies his chief merit – one which ranks him among the foremost exegites of all times.╙ (Catholic Encyclopedia , Vol. XI, Thomas Plassman, p. 63)

“what joy may you have, that you living to such an age, shall see the blessings of God on your labours while you live” Country House-Wife’s Garden 1631

273J William Lawson (1553/4–1635)

A nevv orchard and garden or The best way for planting, grafting, and to make any ground good, for a rich orchard: particularly in the north, and generally for the whole kingdome of England, as in nature, reason, situation, and all probabilitie, may and doth appeare. Wit the country housewifes garden for hearbes of common vse their vertues, seasons, profits, ornaments, varietie of knots, models for trees, and plots for the best ordering of grounds and walkes. As also the husbandry of bees, with their seuerall vses and annoyances all being the experience of 48. yeares labour, and now the second time corrected and much enlarged, by William Lawson. Whereunto is newly added the art of propagating plants, with the true ordering of all manner of fruits, in their gathering, carring home & preseruation.

aha2_log

London: Printed by Nicholas Okes, for Iohn Harison, at the golden Vnicorne in Pater-noster-row, 1631.    $1,900

 

Quarto.A⁴ B-I⁸ K⁴ (last leaf blank).

This copy is disbound  in a folding cloth binder  There are a few woodcut illustrations.    Minor wear, one leaf cropped close with slight loss; a very nice copy.

This is an early issue of this horticultural classic, first published in 1618, and notable for the inclusion of Lawson’s Country House-Wife’s Garden, the first book on the subject specifically written for women, and one of the most delightful gardening books in the language, illustrated with the oft-reproduced cuts of knot designs.

aha2_orchardWilliam Lawson was a writer on gardening and Church of England clergyman, was probably a member of the extensive northern English gentry family of Lawson, but his parents’ names are not known. He was ordained deacon in 1580, and became vicar of Ormesby, near Teesmouth, in the North Riding of Yorkshire, in 1583. He spent the rest of his life there. His first wife, Sibille, with whom he had two children, was buried at Ormesby in 1618; on 28 April 1619 he married Emme Tailer, who survived him.  Lawson was a long-lived Yorkshire parson and a real ‘hands on’ gardener: he declares his book to be written from ‘my meer and sole experience, without respect to any former-written Treatise’. His two passions were orchards and bees and he covers all aspects of his subjects, soil management, planting and pruning, the construction of beehives, the control of various ‘nuisances’ (including birds, deer and moles) and the harvesting of fruits and honey.

Lawson refers several times to the difficulties of the local environment and warns his fellow northern gardeners to ‘meddle not with Apricockes nor Peaches, nor scarcely with Quinces, which will not like our cold parts’. He also stresses how important it is to keep bees in weatherproof accommodation using a good northern term to explain that the ‘nesh Bee can neither abide cold or wet’!  However, he writes lyrically of the pleasures of an orchard: ‘your trees standing in comely order which way soever you look … your borders on every side hanging and drooping with Feberries, Raspberries, Barberries, Currents and the roots of your trees powdred with Strawberries, red,white and green, what pleasure is this?Interestingly, in his advice to the country housewife, Lawson advises that every household should maintain two gardens, a kitchen garden and a flower garden. He suggests that the reason for this is that ‘your garden flowers shall suffer some disgrace if among them you intermingle onions, parsnips etc’.
aha2_tree

The woodcuts which illustrate the book are delightful (Lawson tell us that he instructed the publisher to expend ‘much cost and care … in having the Knots and Models by the best Artizan cut’) They include patterns for knot gardens (the little prancing horse and the man with a sword represent topiary designs) and images of gardeners, sporting some very jaunty headwear, digging and planting.

Lawson’s summary of the satisfaction to be gained from gardening remains as true today as it was for his seventeenth century readers: ‘whereas every other pleasure commonly fills some one of or senses, and that only, with delight, this makes all our senses swim in pleasure’.

aha2_tpcropThis is Lawson’s only book, A new orchard and garden, has a dedication to a connection of one branch of the Lawsons, Sir Henry Belasyse. It was the first published work on gardening in the north of England, and its second section, Aha2_countrytp.jpeg

The Countrie Housewifes Garden, was the first horticultural work written specifically for women (there would not be another in English for a century). The ‘sound, clear, natural wit’ manifested in it was praised by John Beale forty years later (Beale, 14), Illustrated with cuts of tools, a garden plan, and knot designs.

aha2_beehives

ESTC S4739;  STC 15331.3; Henrey 228n, p. 160; Rohde, p. 54; British Bee Books 20; Poynter, p. 176.

‘To conclude, what joy may you have, that you living to such an age, shall see the blessings of God on your labours while you live, and leave behind you to heirs or successors (for God will make heires) such a work, that many ages after your death, shall record your love to their Country? And the rather, when you consider to what length of time your worke is like to last’

Three libraries hold copies in the US!, Berkeley :University of Illinois :Yale

and now I will copy from  GLASGOW UNIVERSITY LIBRARY SPECIAL COLLECTIONS DEPARTMENT

Book of the Month

July 2006

William Lawson 

A New Orchard and Garden with The Country-Housewifes Garden for Herbs

London: 1648.     Sp Coll Ferguson Ah-a.2

Our July choice is a popular Renaissance work on gardening, A new orchard and garden by William Lawson. It was printed together with the first horticultural book written solely for women, The country housewife’s garden. Both are full of sensible and practical advice, imbued with Lawson’s charming philosophy. For Lawson, working in the orchard and garden was the ideal kind of rest and relaxation: ‘For whereas every other pleasure commonly fills some one of our senses, and that only, with delight, this makes all our senses swim in pleasure, and that with infinite variety joyned with no lesse commodity’.
William Lawson (1553/4-1635) was the vicar of Ormesby, a country parish in Yorkshire.  First and foremost a religious man who carried out his clerical duties most diligently, he was obviously also a keen gardener with considerable land. A man of some learning, he evidently read widely on agriculture and gardening, and his two works are also scattered with references to the classics. When he died he willed ‘all my latine books & mie English books of contraversie’ to his son William, which suggests that he may well have owned a relatively substantial library of books for the period.
A New Orchard and Garden and The Country Housewife’s Garden were Lawson’s only published works. They were first printed together in 1618* and proved popular enough to warrant further reprints in quick succession. The copy featured here is a later, enlarged edition from 1648, part of A Way to Get Wealth, a compilation of treatises on husbandry and other household matters by Gervase Markham.
Lawson dedicated his work to Sir Henry Belloses (Belasyse), a prominent Yorkshire baronet who was also an orchard enthusiast. In his dedication, Lawson thanks him for the profit he received from his ‘learned Discourse of Fruit trees’. However, in the preface following he is at pains to point out that his book is in fact a product of ‘my meer and sole experience, without respect to any former-written Treatise’. It is a result of forty eight years experience in working a northern garden. Occasionally in the text he refers to the difficulties of this environment. He advises his fellow northerners, for instance, to ‘meddle not with Apricockes nor Peaches, nor scarcely with Quinces, which will not like our cold parts’. This book can therefore be credited with being the first to deal with the northern garden.
Gardening had become a national passion in the Sixteenth Century. Then, as now, it was a recreation that brought peace and contentment, and Eyler suggests that it provided a welcome escape from the trials of a turbulent age. Renaissance interest was certainly sparked by the influence of Protestant refugees from the Continent, while an increase in travel abroad and geographical discovery brought back new plants and ideas. There was a subsequent demand for new knowledge and exchange of information, spurring the production of horticultural manuals such as this.
Although not published until 1618, Lawson’s work is really the product of an Elizabethan life. But it is interesting to note that in its practicality, it is also an example of the age of reason; at this time there was a growing preoccupancy with the workings of nature and science, and a burgeoning interest in subjects such as botany, concentrating on the useful qualities and medical virtues of plants. Such a utilitarian outlook was also to be found in the tenets of Puritanism: good husbandry was keenly pursued, physical toil being regarded as a form of devotion to God. It should be remembered that Lawson was a Protestant preacher, and as Thick points out, his religious convictions were broadly puritan; as he states, he had no time for ‘popery and knavery’.
The heading preceding the first chapter sums up the aim of Lawson’s New Orchard: ‘the best, sure and readiest way to make a good orchard and garden’.  He begins with the traits to be sought in a good gardener should the reader be in the position to employ one: he should be honest, and certainly not ‘an idle, or lazie lubber’. If lucky enough to have the services of such a paragon, ‘God shall crowne the labours of his hands with joyfulnesse, and make the clouds drop fatnesse upon your trees’. For those who have to roll up their own sleeves, however, Lawson has written this book and ‘gathered these rules’ together.
 
The work goes on to deal comprehensively with all aspects of orchard management, covering: the kind of soil required (‘blacke, fat, mellow, cleane and well tempered’) and how to improve it; the best kind of site and how to protect it with fencing, or even better, ‘quickwood, and moates or ditches of water’; how to deal with ‘annoyances’ such as animals, birds, thieves, disease and the weather (not to mention the evils of a ‘carelesse master’); how to plant, space and prune your trees; the different types of fruit trees and bushes and their qualities; and how to gather, store and preserve the fruits of your labours. As Lawson sums up, ‘skill and pains, bring fruitful gains’.
Lawson’s advice is eminently sensible. His instructions are clear and obviously draw on the considerable personal skills he accrued over his lifetime. However, it is the underlying philosophy of the author and his frequent lyricism and rhetorical eloquence that still makes this book such a pleasure to read today. This is apparent even in the most technical of chapters, where Lawson deals with topics such as raising sets, planting and grafting. A typical example is found in the section on pruning where he emphasises the need for man’s intervention by drawing a comparison with an uncultivated wood full of neglected, rotten, and dying trees, as he rails: ‘What rottennesse? what hollownes? what dead armes? withered tops? curtalled trunks? what loads of mosses? drouping boughes? & dying branches shall you see everywhere?’
 
 
But Lawson’s sentiments rarely override his practicality. For instance, he devotes a considerable section to the measures required to counteract the ‘whole Army of mischiefs’ that plague the gardener. He ruefully acknowledges that ‘Good things have most enemies’ and catalogues a whole host of enemies ranging from deer to moles (they will ‘anger you’). He even advises that sparrowhawks are useful against plundering garden birds: although he acknowledges the delight of hearing blackbirds and thrushes singing on a May morning, ‘I had rather want their company than my fruit’.
Despite his problem with flying cherry thieves, the overall impression gained from reading the book is that Lawson’s ideal garden would be a delight. As well as abundant fruit trees, there would be sweet scented flowers, humming bees (whom, he assures us, do not sting their friends), beautiful ornaments, silver sounding music, broad and long walkways, a maze, and even a bowling alley for exercise.
The satisfied gardener should ‘view now with delight the works of your owne hands, your fruit trees of all sorts, loaden with sweet blossomes, and fruit of all tasts, operations and colours: your trees standing in comely order which way soever you look … Your borders on every side hanging and drooping with Feberries, Raspberries, Barberries, Currents, and the roots of your trees powdred with Strawberries, red, white and green, what a pleasure is this?’
Having gathered in the  harvest, Lawson recommends a period of reflection: ‘Now pause with your selfe, and view the end of all your labours in an Orchard: unspeakable pleasure, and infinite commodity’. But although the yield will hopefully be profitable, the means is not all about the end: ‘For what is greedy gaine, without delight, but moyling, and turmoyling in slavery? But comfortable delight, with content, is the good of every thing, and the patterne of heaven … And who can deny but the principall end of an orchard, is the honest delight of one wearied with the works of his lawfull calling?’
The book is also loved for its woodcut illustrations. In the preface, Lawson explains that no expense was spared in producing these for the ‘common good’: much ‘cost and care’ was bestowed by the publisher in having them produced by ‘the best Artizan’.
The illustration depicting the ‘overall plan for the form of a garden’ is a simplified view of a typical late Elizabethan garden. The overall rectangular shape is split into six square sections set over three levels or terraces, negotiated via flights of stairs and intercrossing walkways. Its design demonstrates the Tudors love for symmetry and patterns. A mount (‘M’) at each corner overlooks the garden and the countryside beyond it, and a fountain plays at one of the walkway crossings. There are two still houses in the top corners (‘N’). The individual gardens within gardens are variously landscaped with trees, kitchen gardens, flowerbeds, knots, and topiary (signified by the horse and sword wielding man). A river runs at the top and bottom of the garden. The presence of water nearby is lauded as being both practical (in providing moisture for thirsty trees and in acting as a barrier) and pleasant for sport, for ‘you might sit in your mount and angle a peckled trout, sleighty eel or some other daintie fish’. According to Malcolm Thick, this garden would have been considered old-fashioned by the most fashion-conscious gentlemen of the early Seventeenth Century who were more interested in Italian influenced grand ‘Renaissance’ gardens, preferably laid out by a Continental gardeners. But is should be remembered that Lawson was hearkening back to the 1570s when writing his work, and the gardens he favoured ‘had an intimacy never regained once the impact of the high Italian Renaissance and the French grand manner reached England’ (Miles Hadfield, quoted by Thick).
The second work in Lawson’s book, The Country Housewife’s Companion, lacks the philosophical discourses of its companion volume. This is perhaps because it was written specifically for women (‘my country housewife, not skillful artists’), and its simple tone is therefore pitched at a less learned readership. Nonetheless, it frequently refers to the text of The New Orchard and it seems that the two books were intended to be read and used together.
The book is split into a series of short chapters that offer advice on a number of topics, including the soil and layout of the ideal garden, the properties of various herbs and plants, general rules for gardening, and the husbandry of bees.
Lawson suggests that each household should have two gardens: a kitchen garden and a flower garden. He explains that the distinction between the two does not have to be perfect but that ‘your garden flowers shall suffer some disgrace if among them you intermingle onions, parsnips,etc.’ The division is for both practical and aesthetic reasons: that ‘for your kitchen’s use must yield daily roots or other herbs and suffer deformity’ while ‘the herbs of both will not be both alike ready at one time either for gathering or removing’.
The flower (or ‘summer’) garden could be set out in  in squares and knots. Lawson recommends using a mix of flowers and herbs, mentioning roses, rosemary, lavendar, hyssop, sage, thyme, cowslips, peonies, daisies, clove-gilliflowers, pinks, and lilies. Several illustrations of patterns for knot gardens are provided, but Lawson concedes that for these ‘speciall formes in squares’  there are as many devices as ‘gardeners braines’ and prefers to ‘leave every house-wife to herself.’
plans for knots (pages 80-82 [ie 81])
aha2_beehives
This work also provides detailed information about bee-keeping, covering everything from constructing a hive to extracting honey. This again was based on personal experience, Lawson telling us that he was a ‘Bee-master’ for many years. He goes against conventional wisdom in preferring a straw hive for his bees over a wooden one, but says that he recommends them for ‘nimblenesse, closenesse, warmnesse and drynesse.’ He emphasises the tenderness of bees on several occasions, saying, for example, that the ‘nesh Bee can neither abide cold or wet’.
Two short pamphlets are appended to the end of Lawson’s work: A most profitable new treatise, from approved experience of the art of propagating plants by Simon Harward (pages 109-123) and The husbandmans fruitfull orchard (pages 125-134). Harward’s work is an in-depth explanation of the methodology for layering and grafting trees. The last work is a common sense guide to picking, packing, transporting and preserving fruit.
We do not know who originally owned this copy of the book, but the volume does bear intriguing glimpses of its past life. An annotation in an Italic hand at the foot of the main title-page indicates that the book was in Durham and purchased for six shillings at some unspecified point in its history. This inscription is followed by a more obscure annotation – possibly the initials ‘J.G.’, the initials ‘I.G. also being blind stamped on the front board of the binding.
aha2_orchard
Glasgow University Library acquired the book as part of the collection of John Ferguson, purchased in 1920. Ferguson (1838-1916) was a Professor of Chemistry at Glasgow University from 1874 to 1915. Although his library is justly renowned for its strengths in Alchemy and Chemistry, it also contains many interesting books and manuals on practical topics such as gardening, husbandry and cookery. According to a note in the front pastedown, Ferguson bought this book on 16 February, 1906.
This book will be on display in the Special Collections foyer (on level 12 of Glasgow University Library), along with a small selection of other gardening books, until the end of September 2006.

‘To conclude, what joy may you have, that you living to such an age, shall see the blessings of God on your labours while you live, and leave behind you to heirs or successors (for God will make heires) such a work, that many ages after your death, shall record your love to their Country? And the rather, when you consider to what length of time your worke is like to last’.

 

An early fifteenth century manuscript Homiliary

281J           Early 15th century  Homiliary  

{Homiliarius doctorum qui omiliarius dici solet … Hieronymi Augustini, Ambrosii, Jo. Chrysostomi, Gregorii, Origenis, Bede et complures ..}?

IMG_0848 St Augustine (354- 430),  John Christomos  (349-407) St Benedict , Pope Leo  I(440-61) ( and others)

Spain,  15th century.                           $37,000

Large Folio.  12 ½ x 9 1/4  inches Leaf size, text block is 9 3/4 x 6 inches.

196 Leaves This manuscript begins at Leaf 141 and continues to CCCXXVIII, (141- 337 leaves). For a total of 196 manuscript leaves on vellum. There are catch words and original it had signatures in the beginning of each quire, but they are now unintelligible. There are IMG_0878thirty five  large decorated initials with nice neat pen work. This book has seen a lot of use. Some pages have been trimmed, sections have been scratched out and others corrected. many leaves have cuts and cracks some repaired earlier than later, by stitching .

This is a collection of Homilies. Who was the editor is  not certain, and while traditionally it is attributed to Paul  the Deacon  approximately 720-799 There is also supposition that it was collected by Alcuin or even Bede.                                      What we do know is that the production of IMG_0819Homiliary began in the 780s when Charlemagne (742/743–814) appointed  Paul the Deacon to compose a Homiliary. Charlemagne,” has been represented as the sponsor or even creator of medieval education, and the Carolingian renaissance has been represented as the renewal of Western culture. This renaissance, however, built on earlier episcopal and monastic developments, and, although Charlemagne did help to ensure the survival of scholarly traditions in a relatively bleak and rude age, there was nothing like the general advance in education that occurred later IMG_0833with the cultural awakening of the 11th and 12th centuries. Learning, IMG_0880nonetheless, had no more ardent friend than Charlemagne, who came to the Frankish throne in 768 distressed to find extremely poor education systems” [EB] “Charlemagne stands out as the personification of everything that is unselfish and noble, a conqueror who visualized himself as the champion of European unity with the purpose of saving Europe through imperial conquest—an evangelist with a sword. As it turns out, Charlemagne did see himself as the Conqueror of everything pagan and heterodox and the divinely destined builder of Augustine’s City of God—of “one God, one emperor, one pope, one city of God.”[2]  It was as if Charlemagne consciously sought to fulfill Plato’s vision of the ideal philosopher king. After all, Europe badly needed a conquering strong man like David of old, who could exercise wisdom and discernment in the sustainment of God’s new Jerusalem on earth.” [Gregory W. Hamilton ;http://nrla.com/charlemagne-and-the-vision-of-a-christian-empire/%5DIMG_0802

So, We do know that ” From a very early time the Homilies of the Fathers were in high esteem, and were read in connection with the recitation of the Divine Office. That the custom was as old as the sixth century we know since St. Gregory the Great refers to it, and St. Benedict mentions it in his rule (Pierre Batiffol, History of the Roman Breviary, 107). This was particularly true of the homilies of Pope St. Leo I, very terse and peculiarly suited to liturgical purposesDSC_0053This particular Homilarium Begins [folio cxli] with Ambrose (340-397) Homilies for the  Quadragesima  (forty days of Lent -Yes lent is longer than 40 days even though there are more 40 days from Ash Wednesday to Easter. ( counting the days of Lent excluding its Sundays and the Sacred Triduum, which technically is a separate sacred time.) This takes up to folio cclxxiiii. Following St Ambrose who has iv sermons in this section  are sermons by Origen(IV) Bede( ) John Chrystosom ( ) Cyrill ( v), Augustine (  ) Peter Chrysologus  Archbishop of Ravenna, approximately 400-450 (1) Alcuin of York (  ). Folios 141-275

IMG_0851

After the Quadragesima series begins the Homilies for The Passion of Christ (Holy Week) On Palm Sunday, Jesus and his disciples spent the night in Bethany, a town about two miles east of Jerusalem. This is where Lazarus, whom Jesus had raised from the dead, and his two sisters, Mary and Martha lived. They were close friends of Jesus, and probably hosted Him and His disciples during their final days in Jerusalem.

IMG_0842

Holy Week/Passione homilies occupy folios 246-312.

Augustine,Gregory, Pope Leo, Chrystomos,

Palm Sunday Dominica in ramis palmarum  folios 313-337

Bernard,Pope Leo, Cyprian, Chrystomos,

 

 Ambrose: (c339-397)

IMG_0856

Homiletic commentaries on the Old Testament: the Hexaemeron (Six Days of Creation); De Helia et ieiunio (On Elijah and Fasting); De Iacob et vita beata (On Jacob and the Happy Life); De Abraham; De Cain et Abel; De Ioseph (Joseph); De Isaac vel anima (On Isaac, or The Soul); De Noe (Noah); De interpellatione Iob et David (On the Prayer of Job and David); De patriarchis (On the Patriarchs); De Tobia (Tobit); Explanatio psalmorum (Explanation of the Psalms); Explanatio symboli (Commentary on the Symbol).

Saint Augustine:

IMG_0858

Peter Chrysologus:

IMG_0861

(c. 380 – c. 450) Archbishop of Ravenna, approximately 400-450 , The earliest printed work by Chrysologus is 1575 Insigne et pervetvstvm opvs homiliarum.He is known as the “Doctor of Homilies” for the concise but theologically rich reflections he delivered during his time as the Bishop of Ravenna. His surviving works offer eloquent testimony to the Church’s traditional beliefs about Mary’s perpetual virginity, the penitential value of Lent, Christ’s Eucharistic presence, and the primacy of St. Peter and his successors in the Church. Few details of St. Peter Chrysologus’ biography are known. He was born in the Italian town of Imola in either the late fourth or early fifth century, but sources differ as to whether this occurred around 380 or as late as 406.

John Chrystosom

IMG_0859

Beyond Chrstostoms preaching, the other lasting legacy of John is his influence on Christian liturgy. Two of his writings are particularly notable. He harmonized the liturgical life of the Church by revising the prayers and rubrics of the Divine Liturgy, or celebration of the Holy Eucharist. To this day, Eastern Orthodox and Eastern Catholic Churches of the Byzantine Rite typically celebrate the Divine Liturgy of Saint John Chrysostom as the normal Eucharistic liturgy, although his exact connection with it remains a matter of debate among experts.

Saint Cyrill. IMG_0857  Cyril’s jurisdiction over Jerusalem was expressly confirmed by the First Council of Constantinople (381), at which he was present. At that council he voted for acceptance of the term homoousios,(“consubstantial” this term was later also applied to the Holy Spirit in order to designate it as being “same in essence” with the Father and the Son. Those notions became cornerstones of theology in Nicene Christianity, and also represent one of the most important theological concepts within the Trinitarian doctrinal understanding of God) having been finally convinced that there was no better alternative. Cyril’s writings are filled with the loving and forgiving nature of God which was somewhat uncommon during his time period. Cyril fills his writings with great lines of the healing power of forgiveness and the Holy Spirit, like “The Spirit comes gently and makes himself known by his fragrance. He is not felt as a burden for God is light, very light. Rays of light and knowledge stream before him as the Spirit approaches. The Spirit comes with the tenderness of a true friend to save, to heal, to teach, to counsel, to strengthen and to console”. Cyril himself followed God’s message of forgiveness many times throughout his life. This is most clearly seen in his two major exiles where Cyril was disgraced and forced to leave his position and his people behind. He never wrote or showed any ill will towards those who wronged him. Cyril stressed the themes of healing and regeneration in his catechesis. the well-known Catechetical Lectures of St. Cyril of Jerusalem, to explain them to the catechumens during the latter part of Lent

Holy God, you gather the whole universe
into your radiant presence and continually reveal your Son as our Savior.
Bring healing to all wounds,
make whole all that is broken,
speak truth to all illusion,
and shed light in every darkness,
that all creation will see your glory and know your Christ. Amen.

St. Gregory the Great (ca. 540-604).

IMG_0863

Alcuin of York : Flaccus Albinus Alcuinus; c. 735 – 19 May 804 AD)—also called Ealhwine, Alhwin or Alchoinwas an English scholar, clergyman, poet and teacher from York, Northumbria. He was born around 735 and became the student of Archbishop Ecgbert at York. At the invitation of Charlemagne, he was a leading scholar and teacher at the Carolingian court, where he remained a figure in the 780s and ’90s.

IMG_0881Alcuin wrote many theological and dogmatic treatises, as well as a few grammatical works and a number of poems. He was made Abbot of Tours in 796, where he remained until his death. “The most learned man anywhere to be found”, according to Einhard‘s Life of Charlemagne (ca. 817-833), he is considered among the most important architects of the Carolingian Renaissance. Among his pupils were many of the dominant intellectuals of the Carolingian era

.

Origen :IMG_0860

The homilies (homiliai, homiliae, tractatus) were familiar discourses on texts of Scripture, often extemporary and recorded as well as possible by stenographers. The list is long and undoubtedly must have been longer if it be true that Origen, as St. Pamphilus declares in his “Apology” preached almost every day. There remain in Greek twenty-one (twenty on Jeremias and the celebrated homily on the witch of Endor); in Latin, one hundred and eighteen translated by Rufinus, seventy-eight translated by St. Jerome and some others of more of less doubtful authenticity, preserved in this collection of homilies

L’Ultima Cena, Fore-edge painting.

Thomas à Kempis. Of the Imitation of Jesus Christ. London: 1828. First Pickering edition with a double fore-edge painting.

Untitled 2

282J  Thomas à Kempis. Thomas Dibden (1776-1847) tr.

Of the Imitation of Jesus Christ.

London: William Pickering and John Major, 1828.        $ SOLD

First Pickering edition at the Shakespeare Head Press. First Dibdin Edition. ONE OF 750 COPIES (according to Dibdin, “Reminiscences,” p. 829)

Octavo 8 1/4 x 5 inches;  [clx], 389, [1, blank], [1, Additional Subscribers], [1, blank] pages; engraved frontispiece, engraved dedication page inserted and three mounted engravings within the text; fragment of an autograph letter signed by Dibdin mounted before page xxv (Dibdin’s signature is present).

In The Imitation, Thomas combines a painfully accurate analysis of the soul with a clear vision of the fullness of the divine life. He does not describe the spiritual life in a linear way, as if one step precedes another, but instead repeats and embellishes themes, like a symphonic composer.

Untitled 5Thomas Frognall Dibdin’s Introduction to the knowledge of rare and valuable editions of the Greek and Latin Classics (1802) attracted the notice of Lord Spencer, through whose patronage Dibdin obtained a clerical appointment in London. His Bibliotheca Spenceriana (1814–15) became famous for the high quality of its printing. Dibdin traveled widely in search of books and manuscripts, and his Bibliographical, Antiquarian and Picturesque Tour in France and Germany (1821) is typical of his work in containing much lively anecdote, many factual errors, and some excellent engravings. His Bibliomania (1809) contributed to the public’s interest in old and rare books. Among his many other works is the two-volume autobiography.

 This copy is Bound by Rowrod in nineteenth-century brown calf, boards triple-Untitled 4 2ruled and paneled in gilt, spine tooled in gilt in compartments, five raised bands, black gilt morocco lettering label, gilt board edges and turn-ins; marbled endleaves; all edges gilt.spine worn; rear joint cracking; edgewear to boards; some light soiling to boards. Hinges starting; minor occasional foxing in text; a few leaves mildly creased. A good copy with excellent fore-edge paintings. Housed in red cloth slipcase.

With this book there is a fragment of an autograph letter signed by Dibdin mounted before page xxv (Dibdin’s signature is present)

 

 

 

Untitled 2

Finely-detailed full-color double fore-edge paintings of:

The Last Supper after da Vinci

and

The Adoration of the Shephards after Gandolfi. 

Untitled 6

Three early copies of the original exist.

Three of da Vinci’s students, including Giampietrino, made copies of his painting early in the 16th century. Giampietrino did a full-scale copy that is now in London’s Royal Academy of Arts. This oil painting on canvas was the primary resource for the latest restoration of the work. The second copy by Andrea Solari is in the Leonardo da Vinci Museum in Belgium while the third copy by Cesare da Sesto is in the Church of Saint Ambrogio in Switzerland.

Trouble of mind and the disease of melancholly

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.

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.                      $3,800

IMG_0209

 

Octavo     inches. A8 (a)-(d)8 (e)4, B-2E8 ( leaf S7 pages 269/270 torn in the out margin affecting one word in each line) first Edition , bound in original calf boards neatly rebacked.

“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:

“Do not attribute the effects of mere Disease, to the Devil”, He describes how the mind can make the body sick: “If a Man, saith he, that is troubled in Conscience, come to a Minister, it may be, he will look all to the Soul, and nothing to the Body; if he come to a Physician, he considereth the Body, and neglecteth the Soul: for my part, I would never have the Physician’s Counsel despised, nor the Labour of the Minister neglected; because the Soul and Body dwelling together, it is convenient, that as the Soul should be cured, by the Word, by Prayer, by Fasting, or by Comforting; so the Body must be brought into some temperature, by Physick, and Diet, by harmless Diversions, and such like ways.” 

“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. It appears from his biography prefixed to the third edition of his book (London 1808; a second edition appeared in 1706) that he came from a family in which several near relatives were similarly affected ‘so that his case might properly be called natural or hereditary’. 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)

Archibald Alexander (17721851), the first professor at Princeton Theological Seminary, was a perceptive student of human behavior. His insights on counseling, especially on dealing with depression, are remarkably valid for today. In his Thoughts on Religious Experience (1844), Alexander wrote concerning the causes of depression:

“ When religious melancholy becomes a fixed disease, it may be reckoned among the heaviest calamities to which our suffering nature is subject. It resists all argument and rejects every topic of consolation, from whatever source it may proceed. It feeds upon distress and despair and is displeased even with the suggestion or offer of relief. The mind thus affected seizes on those ideas and truths which are most awful and terrifying. Any doctrine which excludes all hope is congenial to the melancholy spirit; it seizes on such things with an unnatural avidity and will not let them go. [Alexander 1978, 35] Alexander tells of Timothy Rogers, a London minister who lived from 1658 to 1728. Rogers was a godly, pious, and able pastor. Yet he was overtaken by a severe depression which today would probably be diagnosed as involutional depression. Rogers’s depression was so acute that he “gave up all hope of the mercy of God, and believed himself to be a vessel of wrath, designed for destruction, for the praise of the glorious justice of the Almighty”(Alexander 1978, 35).

Alexander describes Rogers’s condition in terms that tell us the man was clinically depressed, perhaps even psychotically depressed at times. It is clear that Alexander accepts Rogers’s depressed feelings as genuine and recognizes them as the cause of the spiritual problem which clouded his perceptions. Yet Alexander does not conclude that Rogers was damned, nor does he charge him with spiritual backsliding or lack of faith. Rather he sees a severe depression that needed to be understood. Rogers’s depression eventually ran its course, as do most involutional depressions. Many Christians cared for him and prayed on his behalf. After his depression lifted, Rogers became interested in ministering to others who experienced depression. As part of this effort he wrote treatises entitled Recovery from Sickness and Consolation for the Afflicted . Alexander was so impressed with the preface in Rogers’s Discourse on Trouble of Mind and the Disease of Melancholy that he put its contents verbatim into his own Thoughts on Relgious Experience . Those thoughts of Rogers on depression are of such high caliber that I have reproduced them in the appendix. They are the best material I have found on counseling depressed Christians. (© 1984 by William T. Kirwan)

Wing; R1848; Hunter p248

Copies – N.America

Harvard University Houghton Library

Newberry

U.S. National Library of Medicine

Union Theological Seminary

William Andrews Clark Memorial Library

University of Texas at Austin

Yale University, Medical School

EROTOMANIA or A treatise discoursing of the essence, causes, symptomes, prognosticks, and cure of love, or Erotiqve melancholy. Written by Iames Ferrand Dr. of Physick

IMG_0890

Jacques Ferrand (b. ca. 1575)

EROTOMANIA, OR A TREATISE DISCOURSING OF THE ESSENCE, CAUSES, SYMPTOMES, PROGNOSTICKS, AND CURE OF LOVE, OR EROTIQUE MELANCHOLY.

(Oxford: Printed by L. Lichfield, 1640).                                              $9,500

IMG_0891SMALL OCTAVO (5 3/4 x 3 5/8″). a-b⁸ c⁴ A-Z⁸.. Translated from the French by Edmund Chilmead. FIRST EDITION IN ENGLISH. This copy is neatly bound in 19th century calf with a gilt spine. it is quite a lovely copy.

First some symptoms:

“pale and wan complexion, joined by a slow fever … palpitations of the heart, swelling of the face, depraved appetite, a sense of grief, sighing, causeless tears, irresistible hunger, raging thirst, fainting, oppression, suffocation, insomnia, headaches, melancholy, epilepsy, madness, uterine fury, satyriasis, and other pernicious symptoms …”

This book is filled with details chosen on account of the personal motives and life ex- perience of the author. A close reading of Ferrand’s treatise (in particular a careful comparison of the two editions) reveals that he had to deal with criticism from both the religious establishment (the Catholic Church) and the academic establishment (his colleagues in the Paris medical faculty)

“Climate, diet and physical activity (three of the six “non-natural IMG_0893causes”) were the main elements controlling an individual’s health8. However, a reading of descriptions of the lifestyle which is most likely to lead to being infected by love melancholy makes it clear that the disease was characteristic of a specific social class. Wine, white bread, eggs, rich meats (especially white meat and stuffed poultry), nuts and most sweets were thought to be prob- lematic. Aphrodisiac foods such as honey, exotic fruits, cakes and sweet wines were considered to be extremely dangerous.

A close look at this list reveals a diet available to and typical of only the wealthy, mainly the nobility. Sleeping in a very soft bed was also regarded as very dangerous, since it aroused lust11. Farmers were hardly likely to suffer from this problem. The writers claim that an idle lifestyle that includes excessive dining and minimal physical activity is dangerous for two reasons: first, an idle person wastes his time thinking, which dries the body and makes it melancholic; second, and much worse, idle people indulge in useless activities like plays and dances that involve both men and women and thus induce lust.

“[The disease] is most evident among such as are young and lusty, in the flower of their years, nobly descended, high-fed, such as live idly, and at ease,” writes Burton12. He scorn- fully examines the lifestyle of the nobility, which gives rise to burning desire, and hence to love melancholy. Ferrand, though not as directly critical, em- phasises the same factors and writes that “great lords and ladies are more inclined to this malady than the common people”13. Class difference, formerly only hinted at in the discussion on diet, becomes the major issue. But are young aristocratic men and women, who obviously eat and sleep better than most, more inclined to this disease by reasons of their lifestyle, or is there another cause for their distress?

Having dealt with the various therapeutic techniques, Ferrand declares: “No physician would refuse to someone suffering from erotic mania or melancholy the enjoyment of the object of desire in marriage, in accordance with both divine and human laws, because the wounds of love are cured only by those who made them.”14 Although Ferrand only deals quite briefly with this type of remedy (compared to the dozens of pages he devotes to medical therapies), he is also quite decisive. Only by union with the beloved will the patient be healed completely; but this can be achieved only in accordance with divine and human rules. In his chapter on love melancholy in married couples, Ferrand is obviously fully aware that these rules are in many cases the cause of youthful distress. Acknowledging that marriage is not a guaran- tee against the disease, he admits that love melancholy in married couples is usually the result of the animosity arising in a couple that was forced to marry and consequently sought love outside the marriage bonds”. (Michal Altbauer-Rudnik)

Ferrand declares: “No physician would refuse to someone suffering from erotic mania or melancholy the enjoyment of the object of desire in marriage, in accordance with both divine and human laws, because the wounds of love are cured only by those who made them.”    (Love, Madness and Social Order: Love Melancholy in France and England in the Late Sixteenth and Early Seventeenth Centuries. Michal Altbauer-Rudnik)

 

IMG_0896

Madan notes that “If Robert Burton was acquainted with the first edition of this book, as he may well have been, there can be little doubt that he has taken or imitated the general method and treatment of the subject, in his Anatomy of Melancholy”. Burton certainly owned a copy of the Paris 1623 edition (N. K. Kiessling, The Library of Robert Burton, Oxford, 1988, no. 566).The Inquisition showed an interest, and tried Ferrand for heresy. Today, the work provides a rare insight into 17th century understandings of anxiety, depression, love relations. Robert Burton devoted more than a third of The Anatomy of Melancholy, published in Oxford in 1621, to a discussion of love melancholy.

 

HERE THERE IS A reciprocal connection between disease and society; we can trace on the one hand the way the social world shapes the course of an illness and on the other hand the way the symptoms of an illness shape the social world.

 

References

  1. The Sixteenth Century Journal, Vol. 20, No. 1 (Spring, 1989), pp. 41-53
  2. Lydia Kang MD & Nate Pederson. Quackery: A Brief History of the Worst Ways to Cure Everything “Bleed Yourself to Bliss” (Workman Publishing Company; 2017)
  3. Lesel Dawson, Lovesickness and Gender in Early Modern English Literature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008),
  4. Michal Altbauer-Rudnik. Love, Madness and Social Order: Love Melancholy in France and England in the Late Sixteenth and Early Seventeenth Centuries (Gesnerus 63 (2006) 33–45)                                                                                                    

IMG_0890

QUOTED FROM https://parthenissa.wordpress.com

Erotomania

Which brings us to Erotomania. Originally written in French by Jacques Ferrand in 1623, it is a textbook that discusses the diagnosis and treatment of lovesickness. Translated into English in 1640, Erotomania is prefaced by a series of poems by various Christ Church wits. Rather in the tradition of Coryat’s Crudities, these poems are largely performative, a communal university game that ironises the text they preface and which jokingly frame the book itself as a prophylactic. The first poem, by W. Towers, plays on the conceit that the lovesick reader must have made a mistake in buying the volume, that (s)he has picked it up not for medical reasons but has mistaken it for a pleasurable romance: “Thou, that from this Gay Title, look’st no high’r/Then some Don Errant, or his fullsome Squire”. F. Palmer mock-prophesises the world turned on its head: “The World will all turne Stoicks, when they find/This Physick here”… “Men, as in Plagues, from Marriage will be bent/And every day will seem to be in Lent”

IMG_0894

Prefatory material aside, Erotomania consists of 39 detailed chapters discussing the treatment of love melancholy from surgical remedies to potions. It’s less of a manual than a quasi-conduct book – there are no diagrams, unlike in Ambroise Paré’s works. The physician must devise remedies that are not just physical but moral. Ferrand declares in his introduction: “My chiefest purpose is, to prescribe some remedies for the prevention of this disease of Love, which those men for the most part are subject unto, that have not the power to governe their desires, and subject them to Reasons Lawes: seeing that this unchast Love proves oftentimes the Author of the greatest Mischiefes that are in the world (p4)

IMG_0893

Therapeutic bloodletting, the letting go of a plethora of blood and heat, as much about the control of a patient’s desire and therefore his (usually his) behaviour. In Chapter 38, entitled Chirurgicall Remedies for Love-Melancholy, Ferrand advises: “If the Patient be in good plight of body, fat and corpulent, the first thing wee doe, we must let him bleed, in the Hepatica in the right arme, such a proportionable quantity of blood, as shal be thought convenient both for his disease, complexion, and strength of body…. Phlebotomy makes those that are sad, Merry: appeaseth those that are Angry: and keeps Lovers from running Mad.”

In other words, bloodletting regulates social behaviour. The unruly humoral body must be tamed. Gail Kern Paster’s The Body Embarrassed is the key critical work here; she has brilliantly drawn on Norbert Elias’s theories of the way that violence, bodily functions (including sexual) are ‘civilised’ by ever-increasing thresholds of shame. Paster makes the connection between the disciplining of humoral fluids and the way that the Bakhtinian grotesque and carnivalesque becomes tamed by the classical body. Her study of Middleton’s city comedies and Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar explores the inflections of gender. Anxieties around the ‘leaky vessel’ of the female body, whether through menstruation or urine, underlines the increasing ideological investment in female intactness that becomes a system of control and decorum. (Nowadays the female body is disciplined by the baby diets in Closer magazine and the Daily Mail sidebar of shame. But I digress.)

IMG_0892

Create a website or blog at WordPress.com

Up ↑

%d bloggers like this: