INTRODUCTION Adam Wodeham, OFM (d.) has received only passing mention in the textbooks on the history of medieval philosophy. Although recognized as a major ...

Against the background of changing assessments of Nominalism and its meanings before Ockham, this book examines the reception of Ockham's thought at Oxford and ...

The confrontation between Philip the Fair and Boniface VIII has long been seen as a major turning point for the medieval papacy, for the rise of national monarchies, and for the political shaping of public opinion in late-medieval France. Philip's campaign to gain and display the support of the clergy, the nobility, and townspeople throughout the realm also generated a large body of documentation, much of which survives today. Although frequently explored and exploited during the last four centuries, the archival (...) record is not as straightforward as it appears. While recognizing it as part of a masterly propaganda campaign, one needs to look not simply at the shaping of opinion, but at the shaping of the written record—a case in which the silences, what is not recorded, are often as important as the voices on which our attention has been focused. But before turning to that issue, a brief review of events may be useful. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Latin Aristotle Commentaries, V: Bibliography of Secondary Literature, and: Latin Aristotle Commentaries, I.2: Medieval Authors M–ZWilliam J. CourtenayCharles H. Lohr. Latin Aristotle Commentaries, V: Bibliography of Secondary Literature. Unione Accademica Nazionale, Corpus Philosophorum Medii Aevi, Subsidia XV. Florence: SISMEL–Editioni del Galluzzo, 2005. Pp. xiv + 567. Cloth, €90.00.Charles H. Lohr. Latin Aristotle Commentaries, I.2: Medieval Authors M–Z. Unione Accademica Nazionale, Corpus Philosophorum Medii Aevi, Subsidia XVIII. Florence: SISMEL–Editioni (...) del Galluzzo, 2010. Pp. xiii + 208. Cloth, €95.00.These two books are part of a series of volumes that will bring into final publication form one of the most significant scholarly achievements of the last half-century, Charles Lohr's inventory of the authors and manuscripts of Latin commentaries on the works of Aristotle up to 1650. The project began in the 1960s, and the initial results for the Middle Ages were published sequentially as articles in Traditio between 1967 and 1974, and the inventory for the period from 1500 to 1650 appeared in Studies in the Renaissance and Renaissance Quarterly between 1974 and 1981. The project was modeled along the lines of two great research tools achieved earlier in the twentieth century at Freiburg by Friedrich Stegmüller, namely his Repertorium Commentariorum in Sententias Petri Lombardi (1947) and his Repertorium Biblicum Medii Aevi (1940–). Now, through the Unione Accademica Nazionale and SISMEL, both of Lohr's inventories in revised and expanded form are being published as stand-alone volumes. The first two that appeared were Latin Aristotle Commentaries, II: Renaissance Authors (Subsidia VI, 1988), followed by Latin Aristotle Commentaries, III: Index initiorum—index finium (Subsidia X, 1995). The two volumes being reviewed here are the next two installments.The first of these, the Bibliography of Secondary Literature, is a much-expanded version of Lohr's Commentateurs d'Aristote au moyen-âge latin: Bibliographie de la littérature secondaire récente, Vestigia 2 (Fribourg-Paris, 1988). The intent of that volume was, as the title indicates, to provide a list of the scholarly literature on Aristotelian commentaries since the publication of the articles in Traditio, as well as some older literature that had not been included earlier in the entries for each author. The present version of this work is more than twice as large as the 1988 version, adding books and articles that were missed in the earlier bibliographies as well as publications since 1986 (the cutoff date for the earlier edition). Moreover, the Commentateurs d'Aristote provided a bibliography only for medieval commentaries, while the new Bibliography of Secondary Literature begins with a section covering literature about translations of the works of Aristotle and their Wirkungsgeschichte, then [End Page 141] the section for the literature on medieval authors, and finally the section for bibliography on Renaissance authors.The organization of the bibliography for authors that have generated extensive literature is more complex than for the others. The longer bibliographies are divided into works concerned with biographical information and manuscripts; general accounts; and, depending on the contributions of a specific author, sections on logic, metaphysics, natural philosophy, and practical philosophy. Within each of these sections the literature is arranged by date of publication, moving from the older to the most recent (limited, of course, by the cutoff date at which this volume was prepared for publication, apparently around 2003). The principle of inclusion was broad, citing works that relate tangentially to the subject areas of Aristotelian philosophy mentioned. And although bibliographies of this kind should be made available on the Internet, where they can be continually expanded and updated, it is useful and pleasurable to have such a volume on the shelf at one's fingertips, particularly for those of us still attuned to a print culture.The other volume, Latin Aristotle Commentaries, I.2: M–Z, published in 2010, is the second half of the revised edition of medieval authors and their commentaries on Aristotle's works. Some bibliography is included here in the individual entries, but only what relates to the manuscripts. The entries consist of a brief biographical sketch of the author, followed by the list of commentaries (both extant and lost), each one with an... (shrink)

Cet article reprend sur de nouveaux frais la question de la carrière académique de Francis Caracciolo, et de son importance dans le milieu de Durand de Saint-Pourçain et de ses contemporains. Il confirme que Caracciolo était bien la personne visée par la désignation « cancellarius » dans les textes théologiques parisiens de la seconde décennie du xiv e siècle, y compris les Notabilia Cancellarii ; la thèse de Harclay s’en trouve réfutée. L’article rejette également l’attribution à Caracciolo de deux Quodlibeta (...) dans le ms. Vat. lat. 932 tout en envisageant la possibilité que Radulphus de Hotot en soit l’auteur. (shrink)

Le débat sur l’existence réelle du point a occupé une place importante dans les débats philosophiques parisiens du deuxième quart du xive siècle. La contribution de Jean Buridan à ce débat est bien connue mais à ce jour, l’identité d’un certain « magister M. de Montescalerio », adversaire réaliste de Buridan et auteur d’une Determinatio de puncto, est restée inconnue. Cet article établit l’identité de cet important maître actif vers 1340 à la faculté des arts de Paris et en retrace (...) la carrière. (shrink)

St. Omer MS 239 contains the unstudied Lectura of Pastor de Serrescuderio, OFM, who read the Sentences at Paris in 1332-33. The article traces his academic and ecclesiastical career from provincial minister in Provence to cardinal at Avignon, and includes the list of question titles from his Lectura.

Jean Buridan has sometimes been mentioned as an example of a highly successful teaching career, not simply in terms of reputation and honor but in material rewards as well1. This is all the more remarkable because his academic career was solely within the faculty of arts at Paris as a teacher of logic, natural philosophy, and ethics. Access to substantial ecclesiastical income was usually reserved for masters in the higher faculties of theology, canon law, and medicine, the latter two disciplines (...) also allowing additional outside income through private practice. If Buridan's income in later years was as large as has been suggested, it is important testimony to the material importance of philosophy in fourteenth-century universities, at least for its most noted practitioners. (shrink)

In recent decades the publication of additional documentary sources and doctrinal and prosopographical studies for the University of Paris in the 1330s has radically expanded our information about theologians in what was once an obscure decade. Using a variety of evidence, this article outlines what we now know about bachelors of the Sentences active at Paris in the 1330s, part of what the author once called “the dormition of Paris.”.

While we know the year in which many bachelors of theology read the Sentences at Paris, we do not have equivalent information on bachelors of theology at Oxford. This note discusses the limitations of the principal source for Oxford, the Biographical Register of the University of Oxford, and illustrates the importance of consulting the manuscript sources, especially both series of registers of common letters in the Vatican Archives.

This report recounts three developments during the last two years of the SIEPM Project to revise and complete the repertory of commentaries on Peter Lombard’s Sentences published by Friedrich Stegmüller in 1947. The chronological sections of the project have been established, and scholars have been assigned to lead them. A centralized administration for the Project is now located in Freiburg im Breisgau, which will co-ordinate the various sections and preserve their findings, as well as facilitate and oversee the various editorial (...) projects on commentaries on the Sentences currently underway. (shrink)

Harvard Ms lat. 162 contains theological questions disputed at the University of Vienna between 1426 and the mid 1430s. The article identifies the respondents in these disputations, conducted under Petrus Reicher de Pirchenwart, regent master in theology. Although some of these theologians, such as Johannes de Gmund, Narcissus Hertz, and Thomas Ebendorfer are well known, most have not left any surviving theological writings. This makes these disputations particularly valuable for the intellectual history of the University of Vienna in the second (...) quarter of the fifteenth century. (shrink)