Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-12T22:28:04.866Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Pulchrum esse: The Beauty of Scripture, the Beauty of the Soul, and the Art of Exegesis in Hugh of St. Victor

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 February 2016

Boyd Taylor Coolman
Boyd Taylor Coolman*
Affiliation:
Duke University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Pondering the narrative of creation given in Genesis in his De sacramentis Christianae fidei, Hugh of St. Victor (d. 1142) raises the question of whether creation was instantaneous or required a literal six days. Hugh opts for the latter. Though instantaneous creation was of course possible, he argues that God created in six days, proceeding gradually through increasing degrees of form and beauty, so that the rational creature “might discern how great was the difference between esse and pulchrum esse,” between “being” and “beautiful being.” God's intention, Hugh declares, was that rational creatures would be “warned not to be content with having received being [esse] from the Creator,” but would strive for “beautiful being” (pulchrum esse). The primary task of the human being in Eden, therefore, was twofold: first, a discernment, an exegesis that rightly interpreted the pulchrum esse of creation to be a manifestation of divine Beauty; second, a realization of pulchrum esse within itself. In large measure, for Hugh, the ensuing Fall entailed a failure to fulfill this original exegetical and ethical calling.

Type
Research Article
Information
Traditio , Volume 58 , 2003 , pp. 175 - 200
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 by Fordham University 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 PL 176:173A–618B. Hugh of Saint Victor: On the Sacraments of the Christian Faith (De sacramentis), trans. Deferrari, R. J., Medieval Academy of America, 58 (Cambridge, Mass., 1951). Cited hereafter as De sacramentis. This is an expanded and revised version of a paper read in 2001 at the International Congress on Medieval Studies, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Mich. I am indebted to Elizabeth A. R. Brown and Michael Roberts for their insightful editorial suggestions and invaluable improvements on my Latin translations.Google Scholar

2 The abbey of Saint Victor was founded in Paris by William of Champeaux in 1108 and housed an Augustinian order of regular canons. For the most recent study of the early history of the abbey see Bautier, Robert-Henri, “Les origines et les premiers développements de l'abbaye Saint-Victor de Paris,” in L'abbaye parisienne de Saint-Victor au Moyen Âge , ed. Longère, Jean, Bibliotheca Victorina, 1 (Turnhout, 1991), 23–52.Google Scholar

3 De sacramentis 1.1.3 (PL 176:189A; Deferrari, 9): “Idcirco foris prius ei demonstrata est informis materia, postea formata, ut quanta foret inter esse et pulchrum esse distantia discerneret. Ac per hoc admonita est ne contenta esset eo quod per conditionem a Creatore esse acceperat, donec et pulchrum esse atque beatum esse adipisceretur….” Google Scholar

4 For Hugh's theology, see Baron, Roger, Science et sagesse chez Hugues de Saint-Victor (Paris, 1957) and the numerous articles by Zinn, Grover A. Jr., including “Book and Word: The Victorine Background of Bonaventure's Use of Symbols,” in S. Bonaventura 1274–1974 , ed. Papini, Francesco P. and Bougerol, Jacques C., 5 vols. (Rome, 1973), 2:143–69; “Hugh of St. Victor and the Art of Memory,” Viator 5 (1974): 211–34; “Hugh of St. Victor and the Ark of Noah: A New Look,” Church History 40 (1971): 261–72; “De gradibus ascensionum: The Stages of Contemplative Ascent in Two Treatises on Noah's Ark by Hugh of St. Victor,” Studies in Medieval Culture 5 (1975): 61–79; “Hugh of St. Victor, Isaiah's Vision and De arca Noe,” in The Church and the Arts, ed. Wood, Diana, Studies in Church History, 28 (Oxford, 1992), 99–116; “Mandala Use and Symbolism in the Mysticism of Hugh of St. Victor,” History of Religions 12 (1972–73): 317–41; “Historia fundamentum est: The Role of History in the Contemplative Life according to Hugh of St. Victor,” in Contemporary Reflections on the Medieval Christian Tradition. Essays in Honor of Ray C. Petry, ed. Shriver, George H. (Durham, N.C., 1974), 135–58; “Suger, Theology, and the Pseudo-Dionysian Tradition,” in Abbot Suger and Saint-Denis: A Symposium, ed. Gerson, Paula Lieber (New York, 1986), 33–40; “Hugh of St. Victor's De scripturis et scriptoribus sacris as an Accessus Treatise for the Study of the Bible,” Traditio 52 (1997): 111–34. For Hugh's aesthetic see de Bruyne, Edgar, Études d'esthétique médiévale, 3 vols. (Bruges, 1946), 2:203–50, and Lenka Karfiková, “De esse ad pulchrum esse.” Schönheit in der Theologie Hugos von St. Viktor, Bibliotheca Victorina, 8 (Turnhout, 1998).Google Scholar

5 Karfíková, , “De esse ad pulchrum esse.” Google Scholar

6 On Hugh's exegesis, the standard introduction remains Beryl Smalley's The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages (Oxford, 1952; repr., Notre Dame, 1964), 83–195. See also Châtillon, Jean, “La Bible dans les écoles du XIIe siécle,” in Le moyen âge et la Bible, ed. Riché, Pierre and Lobrichon, Guy (Paris, 1984), 163–97, at 178–83.Google Scholar

7 In hierarchiam caelestem S. Dionysii 2.1 (PL 175:949C): “Secundum hoc ergo a pulchritudine visibili ad invisibilem pulchritudinem mens humana convenienter excitata ascendit….” (My translation.) Google Scholar

8 In hierarchiam 1.1 (PL 175:926D): “Impossibile enim est invisibilia, nisi per visibilia demonstrari: et propterea omnis theologia necesse habet visibilibus demonstrationibus uti in invisibilium declaratione.” (My translation.) Google Scholar

9 De laude charitatis (PL 176:972D): “Si mundus iste pulcher est, qualis putas est pulchritudo ubi Creator mundi est?” (My translation.) Google Scholar

10 Hugonis de Sancto Victore De tribus diebus , ed. Poirel, Dominique, CCM, 177 (Turnhout, 2002), 11: “Consideremus ergo nos quanta sint mirabilia Dei, et per pulcritudinem rerum conditarum quaeramus pulcrum illud pulcrorum omnium pulcerrimum.” (My translation.) According to de Bruyne, with this work, Hugh “est le premier auteur [after John Scotus Eriugena] à consacrer un traité complet à beauté” (Études d'esthétique médiévale, 2:203).Google Scholar

11 De tribus diebus (Poirel, 9–10): “Universus enim mundus iste sensibilis quasi quidam liber est scriptus digito Dei … et singulae creaturae quasi figurae quaedam sunt, non humano placito inventae, sed divino arbitrio institutae ad manifestandam et quodammodo significandam invisibilem Dei sapientiam…. Qui autem spiritualis est et omnia diiudicare potest, in eo quidem quod foris considerat pulcritudinem operis, intus concipit quam miranda sit sapientia creatoris.” (My translation.) Google Scholar

12 Cf. Cizewski, Wanda, “Reading the World as Scripture: Hugh of St. Victor's De tribus diebus,” Florilegium 9 (1987): 65–88.Google Scholar

13 On the tradition of the two books, see de Lubac, Henri, Exégèse médiévale: les quatre sens de l'écriture , 4 vols. (Paris, 1959–64), 1:121–25.Google Scholar

14 Zinn, “De gradibus ascensionum” (n. 4 above), 69.Google Scholar

15 Hugh's notion of “three eyes” offers an original interpretation of the fallen human state. The eye of the flesh sees the external world (extra se) and was unaffected by the Fall; the eye of reason sees the soul and things in the soul (in se) and was bleared in the Fall; the eye of contemplation sees God and divine things (intra se et supra se) and was blinded in the Fall. See In hierarchiam 3.2 (PL 175:976A); De sacramentis 1.10.2 (PL 176:329C–330A; Deferrari, 167).Google Scholar

16 De tribus diebus (Poirel, 9): “Quemadmodum autem si illiteratus quis apertum librum videat, figuras aspicit, litteras non cognoscit.” (My translation.) Cf., Zinn, , “De gradibus ascensionum,” 69.Google Scholar

17 De sacramentis prol. 2 (PL 176:183A-B; Deferrari, 3): “Duo enim sunt opera in quibus universa continentur quae facta sunt. Primum est opus conditionis. Secundum est opus restaurationis. Opus conditionis est quo factum est, ut essent quae non erant. Opus restaurationis est quo factum est ut melius essent quae perierant. Ergo opus conditionis est creatio mundi cum omnibus elementis suis. Opus restaurationis est incarnatio Verbi cum omnibus sacramentis suis; sive iis quae praecesserunt ab initio saeculi, sive iis quae subsequuntur usque ad finem mundi.” Nearly the same description is found in De scripturis et scriptoribus sacris 2 (PL 175:11B): “Duo sunt opera Dei, quibus consummatur omnia quae facta sunt. Primum est opus conditionis, quo facta sunt quae non errant: secundum est opus restaurationis, quo reparata sunt quae perierant. Opus conditionis est creatio mundi cum omnibus elementis suis. Opus restaurationis est incarnatio Verbi cum omnibus sacramentis suis; sive quae ante incarnationem praecesserent ab initio saeculi, sive quae post subsequentur usque ad finem mundi.” See also De vanitate mundi 2 (PL 176:716B–C).Google Scholar

18 PL 175:923A–1154C. See Roques, René, Structures théologiques, de la gnose à Richard de Saint-Victor: essais et analyses critiques (Paris, 1962), 294–364.Google Scholar

19 In hierarchiam 1.1 (PL 175:926D): “Sed mundana, ut diximus, theologia opera conditionis assumpsit, et elementa hujus mundi secundum speciem creata.” (My translation.) Google Scholar

20 Ibid. (PL 175:927A): “Theologia vero divina opera restaurationis elegit secundum humanitatem Iesu, et sacramenta ejus quae ab initio sunt….” Google Scholar

21 Ibid. (PL 175:926B–C): “Duo enim simulacra erant proposita homini, in quibus invisibilia videre potuisset: unum naturae, et unum gratiae. Simulacrum naturae erat species hujus mundi. Simulacrum autem gratiae erat humanitas Verbi.” Google Scholar

22 Ibid. (PL 175:928A–B): “In hac [summa philosophiae, perfectione veritatis] sapientes hujus mundi propterea, sicut iam diximus, stulti facti sunt; quia solo naturali documento secundum elementa et speciem mundi incedentes, exemplaria gratiae non habuerunt: in quibus etsi species erat humilis, sed manifestior praestabatur demonstratio veritatis. Hic ergo stultam fecit Deus ‘sapientiam hujus [mundi]’ (1 Cor. 1:21); quoniam veritatem agnoscere non potuit; quoniam in sua eruditione formam humilitatis tenere contempsit.” [In this, the wise of this world for this reason, as we have already said, have been made fools: since, proceeding only by the natural evidence according to the elements and appearance of this world, they did not have the patterns of grace, in which, though their appearance was humble, yet the demonstration of truth was displayed more manifestly. Here, thus, God made “the wisdom of this world” to be foolish; for it could not recognize the truth, since in its erudition it disdained to hold to the form of humility.] (My translation.) Google Scholar

23 Ibid. (PL 175:926C–D): “Et in utroque Deus monstrabatur, sed non in utroque intelligebatur; quoniam natura quidem specie sua artificem demonstravit, sed contemplantis oculos illuminare non potuit. Humanitas vero Salvatoris et medicina fuit, ut caeci lumen reciperent, et doctrina pariter ut videntes agnoscerent veritatem. ‘Lutum fecit ex sputo: et linivit oculos caeci, et lavit et vidit’ (John 9:6–7). Et quid postea? Deinde videnti et nondum cognoscenti ait: ‘Ego sum, et qui loquitur tecum, ipse est Filius Dei’ (John 9:37). Prius ergo illuminavit, postea demonstravit. Natura enim demonstrare potuit, illuminare non potuit. Et mundus Creatorem suum specie praedicavit, sed intelligentiam veritatis cordibus hominum non infudit. Per simulacra igitur naturae, Creator tantum significabatur; in simulacris vero gratiae praesens Deus ostendebatur, quia illa operatus est ut intelligeretur esse; in istis vero operatus est ut agnosceretur praesens esse.” [In both God was shown, but God was not understood in both; for to be sure by its appearance nature showed its Creator, but it could not illumine the eyes that contemplated it. But the humanity of the Savior was both medicine, so that the blind might receive sight, and at the same time instruction, so that the ones who saw might recognize the truth. “For he made mud from spit, and covered the eyes of the blind man, and the blind man washed and saw.” And what happened next? Then Jesus said to the one who was seeing but not yet understanding: “I am he, and the one who speaks with you, is himself the Son of God.” First, therefore, he illuminated, afterwards he demonstrated. For nature could demonstrate, but could not illuminate. And the world by its appearance announced its Creator, but it did not fill the human heart with the understanding of truth. Through the simulacra of nature, then, the Creator was only signified; but in the simulacra of grace God was shown as present since He created the simulacra of nature in order that He might be understood to exist; but He created the simulacra of grace in order that He might be understood to be present.] (My translation.) Google Scholar

24 Ibid. (PL 175:925D–926B): “Nam, ibi corruere coeperunt in mendacia figmentorum, et assumpserunt species visibiles simulacra divinorum, ut invisibilia viderent per ea, quae videbantur et erat ibi simile aliquid, sed de longe ostendens, quod quaerebatur, neque lucem ingerens oculis caligantibus. Natura enim ad servitutem condita Creatorem suum demonstravit; sed erat similitudo peregrina ad excellentem, et dominantem majestatem. Neque potuit evidentem declarationem invenire in iis omnibus illa, quae docenda fuerat natura, quoniam, et ipsa sana non erat, ut multum claresceret in contemplationem. Non enim habuit quae per gratiam exemplaria formabantur ad sanitatem visionis internae; neque arcam sapientiae noverat, et conditorum thesaurorum, carnem Verbi aeterni in Iesu humanitate; sed naturali solo documento utens lippienti acie lumen nubilum, et ambiguum adducens speculanti in rerum creatarum specie contemplabatur. Propterea erraverunt, et evanuerunt, cum transire vellent mente ea quae sola nosse acceperant et palpantes aestimationibus ad ea quae videri non poterant, caeci inventi sunt qui se videre putaverunt. Haec sunt simulacra errorum….” [For then they began to fall into lying fictions and took visible appearances as images of the divine, in order that they might see invisible things through those things which were seen; and indeed there was some likeness, but what was sought was only distantly evident and brought no light to mist-enshrouded eyes. For nature, created for servitude, pointed to its Creator, but it was a likeness distant from his excellence and lordly majesty. Nor could the nature that was to be taught, find an evident declaration in all those things, since it too was not sound enough to gain much clarity in contemplation. For it did not have the patterns formed by grace for soundness of internal vision; nor did it know the ark of wisdom, and of created treasures, (namely,) the flesh of the eternal Word in the humanity of Jesus; but employing only the evidence of nature with the vision of bleary eyesight, applying only a cloudy and uncertain light, it contemplated the appearance of created things. For this reason they erred and behaved foolishly, since they desired to transcend in mind those things which alone they had received the power to know, and feeling their way with their conjectures toward those things which they were not able to see, they were found to be blind who thought they saw. These are the simulacra of errors….] (My translation.) Google Scholar

25 Cf., Zinn, , “Historia fundamentum est” (n. 4 above), 155.Google Scholar

26 De sacramentis prol. 3 (PL 176:184B; Deferrari, 4): “Quamvis autem principalis materia divinae Scripturae sint opera restaurationis; tamen, ut competentius ad ea tractanda accedat, primum in ipso capite narrationis suae breviter secundum fidem rerum gestarum exordium et constitutionem narrat operum conditionis.” Google Scholar

27 Ibid. prol. 2 (PL 176:183A; Deferrari, 3): “Materia divinarum Scripturarum omnium sunt opera restaurationis humanae;” ibid. (PL 176:183C; Deferrari, 4): “Mundanae sive saeculares scripturae materiam habent opera conditionis. Divina Scriptura materiam habet opera restaurationis”; De scripturis et scriptoribus sacris 2 (PL 175:11C): “Aliarum enim Scripturarum omnium materia est in operibus conditionis, divinarum Scripturarum materia in operibus restaurationis constat.” Google Scholar

28 In hierarchiam 2.1 (PL 175:9400–941A): “Nos invocantes Iesum, respiciemus, quantum possibile est nobis, in illuminationes sacratissimorum eloquiorum, hoc est in sacratissima eloquia, quae illuminant nos doctrina veritatis et intelligentia secretorum, a Patre traditas…. Illuminationes quoque sacratissimorum eloquiorum accipere possumus descriptiones sacri eloquii, et configurationes ex formis visibilibus sumptas, in quibus nobis statum invisibilium rerum, et coelestium secretorum rationem modumque ex proposita similitudine demonstrat. Ipsis enim signis visibilibus humana mens commodius instruitur, et illuminatur ad invisibilium cognitionem. Propterea pene ubique in sacro eloquio rerum visibilium species pro significatione adhibentur.” (My translation.) Google Scholar

29 De sacramentis prol. 5 (PL 176:185A; Deferrari, 5): “In caeteris quidem scripturis solae voces significare inveniantur; in hac autem non solum voces, sed etiam res significativae sint.” See also De scripturis et scriptoribus sacris 5 (PL 175:13B–D).Google Scholar

30 See Smalley, , Study of the Bible (n. 6 above), 90–91.Google Scholar

31 Zinn, , “Suger, Theology, and the Pseudo-Dionysian Tradition” (n. 4 above), 35.Google Scholar

32 See the remarks in the Victorine Miscellanea (PL 177:518B): “Si quis omnem creaturam theophaniam dixerit, non errabit.” Yet, earlier in the same work (PL 177:505A): “Scriptura explicat quae creatura probat.” This seems to correspond to Hugh's comments in In hierarchiam, noted above, which argue that the works of creation merely declare the divine beauty, but only the works of restoration can heal the soul and enable it to perceive creation aright. Thus, Scripture explains what creation shows forth.Google Scholar

33 In Ecclesiasten praef. (PL 175:114C–115C): “Omnis Scriptura secundum propriam interpretationem exposita, et clarius elucescit, et ad intelligendam se faciliorem legentibus pandit accessum. Multi virtutem Scripturarum non intelligentes, expositionibus peregrinis decorem ac pulchritudinem earum obnubilant…. Nunc itaque narrationis superficiem, quae tanta eloquii ac sententiarum venustate pollet explanandam suscipimus, ut ea, quae scripta nunc legitis (hac qualicunque lucubratiuncula, iter ad intelligentiam praebente) amodo non solum vobis scripta, sed a vobis intellecta gaudeatis.” (My translation.) Google Scholar

34 PL 176:994B–C: “Meditatio in lectione est triplicis considerationis. Secundum historiam, allegoriam, tropologiam. Secundum historiam est, quando eorum quae facta sunt rationem vel quaerimus, vel admiramur suis temporibus, et locis, et modo congruo perfectam…. Secundum allegoriam meditatio operatur in dispositione praecedentium, futurorum significationem attendens mira ratione et providentia coaptatam sicut oportuit ad intelligentiam, et fidei formam fabricandam. In tropologiam meditatio operatur quem fructum dicta afferant, exquirens quid faciendum insinuent.” (My translation.) Google Scholar

35 PL 175:9–28.Google Scholar

36 See Zinn, , “Hugh of St. Victor's De scripturis et scriptoribus sacris” (n. 4 above).Google Scholar

37 Hugonis de Sancto Victore Didascalicon De Studio Legendi: A Critical Text , ed. Buttimer, Charles Henry, The Catholic University of America Studies in Medieval and Renaissance Latin, 10 (Washington, D.C., 1939). English translation: The Didascalicon of Hugh of St. Victor: A Medieval Guide to the Arts, trans. and ed. Taylor, Jerome, Records of Western Civilization: Sources and Studies, 64 (New York and London, 1964). Cited hereafter as Didasc., followed by book and chapter, Buttimer and page, and Taylor and page when Taylor's translation is used. Taylor's introduction and notes cited as Taylor, , Didascalicon. Google Scholar

38 Didasc. 5.2 (Buttimer, 95; trans. Taylor, 120, slightly adapted): “Sicut enim in citharis et hujusmodi organis musicis non quidem omnia quae tanguntur canorum aliquid resonant, sed tantum chordae; cetera tamen in toto citharae corpore ideo facta sunt, ut esset ubi connecterentur, et quo tenderentur illa quae ad cantilenae suavitatem modulaturus est artifex.” Hugh is quoting verbatim from Isidore Quaestiones in Vetus Testamentum, praef., 4 (PL 82:208), but independently making the comparison with Scripture (Taylor, , Didascalicon, 219 n. 2). The passage in De scripturis 4 (PL 175:12D–13A) is basically identical: “Sicut enim in cithara et hujusmodi organis musicis, non quidem omnia quae tanguntur canorum aliquid resonant, sed tantum chordae, caetera tamen in toto citharae corpore ideo facta sunt ut esset ubi connecterentur et quo tenderentur illa quae ad cantilenae suavitatem modulaturus est artifex.” Google Scholar

39 Didasc. 5.2 (Buttimer, 96; trans. Taylor, , 121, slightly adapted): “Modo mirabili omnis divina scriptura ita per Dei sapientiam convenienter suis partibus aptata est atque disposita, ut quidquid in ea continetur aut vice chordarum spiritualis intelligentiae suavitatem personet, aut per historiae seriem, et litterae soliditatem mysteriorum dicta sparsim posita continens, et quasi in unum connectens, ad modum ligni concavi super extensas chordas simul copulet, earumque sonum recipiens in se, dulciorem auribus referat, quem non solum chorda edidit, sed et lignum modulo corporis sui formavit.” Google Scholar

40 Bruyne, De, Études d'esthétique médiévale (n. 4 above), 2:208, 216.Google Scholar

41 Ibid., 216.Google Scholar

42 See Gersh, Stephen, Concord in Discourse: Harmonics and Semiotics in Late Classical and Early Medieval Platonism (New York, 1996), 13–45.Google Scholar

43 De Genesi ad litteram libri duodecim 10.21 (PL 34:425): “coaptationem, si ita dicenda est, quam Graeci ἁρμονίαν vocant.” Google Scholar

44 See Zinn, , “Mandala Symbolism” (n. 4 above) and “Book and Word” (n. 4 above).Google Scholar

45 See Esmeijer, Anna C., Divina Quaternitas: A Preliminary Study in the Method and Application of Visual Exegesis (Assen, 1978), 122; Ladner, Gerhart B., “Medieval and Modern Understanding of Symbolism: A Comparison,” Speculum 54 (1979): 223–56, at 225; Roques, René, Structures théologiques (n. 18 above), 326–61; Sicard, Patrice, Diagrammes médiévaux et exégèse visuelle: Le “Libellus de formatione arche” de Hugues de Saint-Victor, Bibiotheca Victorina, 4 (Turnhout, 1993); Weisweiler, Heinrich, “Sakrament als Symbol und Teilhabe: Der Einfluß des Ps.-Dionysius auf die allgemeine Sakramentlehre Hugos v. St. Viktor,” Scholastik 27 (1952): 321–43.Google Scholar

46 In hierarchiam 2.1 (PL 175:941B): “Symbolum est collatio formarum visibilium ad invisibilium demonstrationem.” (My translation.) Ibid. 3.2 (PL 175:960D): “Supra iam diximus quid sit symbolum, collatio videlicet, id est coaptatio visibilium formarum ad demonstrationem rei invisibilis propositarum.” Google Scholar

47 Ibid. 2.1 (PL 175:941A–B): “Est itaque ordo, ut primum sanctarum Scripturarum illuminationes cum invocatione Iesu, per quem interna illuminatio datur et sine quo exterior inanis est, inspiciamus: ac deinde, illuminante Iesu, ex ipsis sacrae Scripturae illuminationibus et demonstrationibus coelestium animorum, id est spirituum coelestium principatus sacros et potestates (qui nobis, nisi per Scripturae sacrae traditiones manifestarentur, invisibiles omnino essent et incogniti), consideremus…. Hierarchias dico manifestatas nobis, hoc est demonstratas, vel revelatas ab ipsis, scilicet illuminationibus, id est demonstrationibus sacri eloquii symbolice et anagogice.” [And so this is the order: that we first investigate the illuminations of sacred Scripture with the invocation of Jesus, through whom interior illumination is given and without whom the exterior is empty; next, with the illumination of Jesus, from those illuminations of sacred Scripture and demonstrations of the heavenly souls, that is, of the celestial spirits, we consider the holy principalities and powers (which to us, unless made manifest through the traditions of sacred Scripture, would remain altogether invisible and unknown)…. For I say that the hierarchies are manifest to us, that is demonstrated or revealed by those things, namely by the illuminations, that is, symbolically and anagogically in the demonstrations of the sacred eloquence.] (My translation.) Google Scholar

48 Emphasis mine. See n. 47 above.Google Scholar

49 Chenu, M.-D., Nature, Man, and Society in the Twelfth Century: Essays on New Theological Perspectives in the Latin West , sel., ed., and trans. Taylor, Jerome and Little, Lester K. (Chicago and London, 1968), 99–145, at 103.Google Scholar

50 Kent Emery argues that Hugh conflates the theory of signs Augustine sets forth in De doctrina Christiana with the theory of sacramental hierarchies set forth in Ps.-Dionysius's The Celestial Hierarchy and The Ecclesiastical Hierarchy. Thus, in creation God's primary intent was self-disclosure through created things in the manner of a divine rhetor: creation is a demonstratio, a persuasive eloquence meant to convert, not however with words but with things (Emery, Kent, “Reading the World Rightly and Squarely: Bonaventure's Doctrine of the Cardinal Virtues,” Traditio 39 [1983]: 183–218, at 217–18).Google Scholar

51 For Hugh's exegesis in the context of the medieval tradition, see Lubac, de, Exégèse médiévale (n. 13 above), esp. 3:287–359.Google Scholar

52 Carruthers, Mary, The Book of Memory: A Study of Memory in Medieval Culture (New York, 1990), 42.Google Scholar

53 See n. 34 above.Google Scholar

54 See Signer, Michael, “Peshat, Sensus Litteralis, and Sequential Narrative: Jewish Exegesis and the School of St. Victor in the Twelfth Century,” in The Frank Talmage Memorial Volume , ed. Walfish, Barry (Haifa, 1993), 1:203–16; Smalley, , Study of the Bible (n. 6 above), 83–106.Google Scholar

55 McGinn, Bernard, The Growth of Mysticism, The Presence of God: A History of Western Mysticism , 2 (New York, 1994), 375.Google Scholar

56 See n. 38 above.Google Scholar

57 See n. 39 above.Google Scholar

58 Didasc. 5.2 (Buttimer, , 95–96; Taylor, , 120–21): “Ita in divinis eloquiis quaedam posita sunt, quae tantum spiritualiter intelligi volunt, quaedam vero morum gravitati deserviunt; quaedam etiam secundum simplicem sensum historiae dicta sunt, nonnulla autem quae et historice, et allegorice, et tropologice convenienter exponi possunt.” Google Scholar

59 Ibid. (Buttimer, , 96; Taylor, , 121): “Oportet ergo sic tractare divinam scripturam, ut nec ubique historiam, nec ubique allegoriam, nec ubique quaeramus tropologiam; sed singula in suis locis, prout ratio postulat, competenter assignare.” Google Scholar

60 Ibid. 6.3 (Buttimer, , 116; trans. Taylor, , 138): “Fundamentum autem et principium doctrinae sacrae historia est, de qua quasi mel de favo, veritas allegoriae exprimitur. Aedificaturus ergo ‘primum fundamentum historiae pone; deinde per significationem typicam in arcem fidei fabricam mentis erige; ad extremum vero, per mortalitatis gratiam quasi pulcherrimo superducto colore aedificium pinge.’” Hugh is quoting with slight adapations from Gregory the Great, Moralium Libri Epistula missoria iii (PL 75:513C) (Taylor, , Didascalicon, 223 n. 9).Google Scholar

61 McGinn, , Growth of Mysticism , 374.Google Scholar

62 Didasc. 6.4 (Buttimer, , 118; Taylor, , 140): “Fundamentum in terra est, nec semper politos habet lapides. Fabrica super terram, et aequalem quaerit structuram. Sic divina pagina multa secundum litteralem sensum continet, quae et sibi repugnare videntur, et nonnunquam absurditatis aut impossibilitatis aliquid afferre.” Google Scholar

63 Ibid. (Buttimer, , 118; Taylor, , 140): “Respice opus caementarii. Collocato fundamento, lineam extendit in directum, perpendiculum demittit, ac deinde lapides diligenter politos in ordinem ponit; alios deinde atque alios quaerit: et si forte aliquos primae dispositioni non respondentes invenerit, accipit limam, praeeminentia praecidit, aspera planat, et informia ad formam reducit; sicque demum reliquis in ordinem dispositis adiungit. Si vero aliquos tales invenerit, qui nec comminui valeant, nec congrue coaptari, eos non assumit, ne forte, dum silicem frangere laborat, limam frangat.” Google Scholar

64 Ibid. (Buttimer, , 119–20; Taylor, , 141–42): “Linum tendis, ponis examussim, quadros in ordinem collocas, et circumgyrans quaedam futurorum murorum vestigia figis. Linea protensa rectae fidei trames est, ipsae spiritualis operis bases quaedam fidei sacramenta sunt, quibus initiaris.” Google Scholar

65 Ibid. (Buttimer, , 120; Taylor, , 142): “Quae aperta invenis, adjunge basi suae, si forte conveniant; quae ambigua sunt, ita interpretare ut non discordent….” Google Scholar

66 Ibid. (Buttimer, , 121; Taylor, , 143): “Quaslibet scripturas ad congruas interpretationes flectere noverunt et quid a fide sana discordet aut quid conveniat iudicare.” Google Scholar

67 Ibid. (Buttimer, , 118–19; Taylor, , 140–41): “primam seriem lapidum super fundamentum collocandorum ad protensam lineam disponi … quibus scilicet totum opus reliquum innititur et coaptatur … hoc quasi aliud quoddam fundamentum est … Hoc fundamentum et portat superposita, et a priori fundamento portatur. Primo fundamento insident omnia, sed non omni modo coaptantur. Huic insident et coaptantur reliqua.” Google Scholar

68 Ibid. (Buttimer, , 118; Taylor, , 140): “Fabrica super terram, et aequalem quaerit structuram.” Google Scholar

69 Ibid. 6.11 (Buttimer, , 128; Taylor, , 149–50): “Sententia divina numquam absurda, numquam falsa esse potest; sed cum sensu, ut dictum est, multa inveniantur contraria; sententia nullam admittit repugnantiam, semper congrua est, semper vera.” Google Scholar

70 Ibid. 6.4 (Buttimer, , 118; Taylor, , 140): “Spiritualis autem intelligentia nullam admittit repugnantiam, in qua diversa multa, adversa nulla esse possunt.” Google Scholar

71 It would seem that a tension remains unresolved here in Hugh's exegetical theory between what appear to be the two competing “controls” on exegesis. On the one hand, the literal sense clearly functions as a fixed framework in both the lyre and edifice metaphors, guiding and shaping subsequent interpretations. On the other hand, it is shaped and molded by the subsequent spiritual interpretation and its criteria of harmony, consonance, and unity.Google Scholar

72 Pelikan, Jaroslav, The Vindication of Tradition (New Haven, 1984), 79–82; for scriptural interpretation see McGrath, Alister, “Reclaiming Our Roots and Vision,” in Reclaiming the Bible for the Church, ed. Braaten, Carl E. and Jenson, Robert W. (Grand Rapids, Mich., 1995), 85.Google Scholar

73 De arca Noe morali 4.9 (PL 176:617–680D, at 678D): “ut doctrina multiplex fiat manente eadem veritate.” English translation: Hugh of St. Victor: Selected Spiritual Writings, trans. by a Religious of The Community of St. Mary the Virgin, intr. by Aelred Squire, Classics of the Contemplative Life (London, 1962). Cited hereafter as De arca Noe morali, book and chapter, followed by PL reference, and by CSVM and page. Except where noted, all translations are CSVM's. See also the recent critical text: Hugonis de Sancto Victore De Archa Noe Libellus de Formatione Arche , ed. Sicard, Patrice, CCM, 176 (Turnhout, 2001).Google Scholar

74 Didasc. 6.2 (Buttimer, , 113; Taylor, , 135): “Ad ultimum consummato opere domus colore superducto vestitur.” Google Scholar

75 See De institutione novitiorum (PL 176:925–52). Cited hereafter as De inst. Google Scholar

76 This pursuit of virtue extended even to the level of manners, comportment, dressing, eating, and gesturing (Stephen Jaeger, C., Envy of Angels: Cathedral Schools and Social Ideals in Medieval Europe, 950–1200 [Philadelphia, 1994], 246).Google Scholar

77 De inst. 7 (PL 176:933B–C): “Quando vero talia operantur quae humanas mentes in admirationem sui pertrahunt, quasi quasdam in se eminentes sculpturas ostendunt. Quod ergo in illis eminet, in nobis introrsum recondi debet….” Google Scholar

78 Ibid. (PL 176:932D): “In ipsis siquidem similitudinis Dei forma expressa est, et idcirco cum eis per imitationem imprimimur, ad ejusdem similitudinis imaginem nos quoque figuramur.” Google Scholar

79 Ibid. 12 (PL 176:943A): “concordiam universitatis.” Google Scholar

80 Cf. Ps-Hugh of St. Victor, Expositio Regulae S. Augustini 6 (PL 176:897C): “Nostrae, ergo, divitiae, nostra pulchritudo boni mores sunt.” Though the attribution of this text to Hugh is not certain, it clearly expresses Hugh's thought on this point.Google Scholar

81 McGinn, , Growth of Mysticism (n. 55 above), 374.Google Scholar

82 Commenting in his De amore sponsi ad sponsam (PL 176:989D) on the verse from the Song of Songs, “Tota speciosa es, proxima mea tota pulchra es,” Hugh remarks: “Quae remota est, turpis quidem est, sed non tota. Quae remotissima est, tota turpis est. Item quae propinqua est, speciosa est, sed adhuc non tota; quae proxima est, tota speciosa est.” [The soul that is far from him is indeed ugly, but not completely so; but the soul that is farthest or very far from him is altogether ugly. In the same way, the soul that is near him is fair, but not completely so; and the soul that is nearest, very near to him, is altogether so.] (My translation.) Google Scholar

83 Soliloquium de arrha animae (PL 176:960D–961A): “Ne unquam obliviscamur eum a quo tantum bonum accepimus. Qui utique si nihil amplius dedisset, pro eo ipso tamen semper a nobis laudandus et diligendus esset. Nunc autem amplius dedit, quia dedit non solum esse, sed pulchrum esse, formosum esse, quod quantum superat nihil per existentiam, tantum antecedit aliquid per formam…. Dedit ergo nobis esse, et pulchrum esse; dedit et vivere, ut praecellamus et iis quae non sunt per essentiam, et iis quae inordinata aut incomposita sunt, per formam, et quae inanimata, per vitam.” Google Scholar

84 Ibid. (PL 176:966C): “Datur etiam tibi speculum sancta Scriptura, ut ibi videas faciem tuam, ne quid minus aut aliter quam decet habeat compositio ornatus tui.” Google Scholar

85 See n. 73 above.Google Scholar

86 PL 176:681A–704A.Google Scholar

87 On the ark treatises in Hugh's theology, see Zinn, , “Hugh of St. Victor and the Ark of Noah”; idem, “De gradibus ascensionum”; idem, “Hugh of St. Victor, Isaiah's Vision and De arca Noe” (all at n. 4 above); idem, “History and Contemplation: The Dimensions of the Restoration of Man in Two Treatises on the Ark of Noah by Hugh of St. Victor” (Ph.D. diss., Duke University, 1969).Google Scholar

88 Zinn, , “De gradibus ascensionum,” 61.Google Scholar

89 See Carruthers, , Book of Memory (n. 52 above), 209.Google Scholar

90 See Sicard, , Diagrammes médiévaux (n. 45 above), 21–53.Google Scholar

91 For a fuller description, see the several articles by Zinn in n. 87 above.Google Scholar

92 See Sicard, , Diagrammes médiévaux , 141–69.Google Scholar

93 De arca Noe morali 1.2 (PL 176:622B–C; CSVM, 52): “Hujus vero spiritualis aedificii exemplar tibi dabo arcam Noe, quam foris videbit oculus tuus, ut ad ejus similitudinem intus fabricetur animus tuus. Videbis ibi colores quosdam, formas et figuras, quae delectent visum. Sed scire debes, ideo haec posita esse, ut in eis discas sapientiam, disciplinam atque virtutem, quae exornent animum tuum.” (My translation.) Google Scholar

94 Zinn, , “De gradibus ascensionum,” 64.Google Scholar

95 Carruthers, , Book of Memory , 123.Google Scholar

96 Zinn, , “De gradibus ascensionum,” 65.Google Scholar

97 De arca Noe morali 4.2 (PL 176:666B–C; CSVM, 126): “Imaginemur quasi humanum animum de hoc mundo sursum ad Deum ascendentem, et in ascendendo magis semper ac magis in unum sese colligentem, et tunc spiritaliter videre poterimus formam arcae nostrae, quae in imo lata fuit, et sursum in angustum surrexit, quousque ad mensuram unius cubiti in cacumine suo perveniret. Similiter enim nos de hoc profundo, de hac convalle lacrymarum per quaedam incrementa virtutum, quasi per quosdam gradus in corde nostro dispositos ascendentes paulatim in unum colligimur, quousque ad illam simplicem unitatem, et veram simplicitatem, aeternamque stabilitatem, quae apud Deum est, pertingamus.” Though Hugh does not use the word coaptare in this text, the concept is clearly implied.Google Scholar

98 Ibid. 1.2 (PL 176:626C; CSVM, 59): “Sapientia quotidie aedificat in cordibus nostris ex iugi legis Dei meditatione.” Google Scholar

99 Carruthers, , Book of Memory , 165.Google Scholar

100 Ibid., 162–63.Google Scholar

101 De arca Noe morali 1.2 (PL 176:621D; CSVM, 50): “Duobus modis Deus cor humanum inhabitat, per cognitionem videlicet et amorem, una tamen mansio est, quia et omnis qui novit cum diligit, et nemo diligere potest qui non novit…. Scientia per cognitionem fidei fabricam erigit, dilectio autem per virtutem quasi colore superducto aedificium pingit.” Google Scholar

102 See Carruthers's account of this process in relation to Hugh ( Book of Memory , 219–20).Google Scholar

103 See Leclercq, Jean, The Love of Learning and the Desire for God: A Study of Monastic Culture , trans. Misrahi, Catharine (New York, 1982), 90: “The meditatio consists in applying oneself with attention to this exercise in total memorization; it is, therefore, inseparable from the lectio. It is what inscribes, so to speak, the sacred text in the body and in the soul.” Google Scholar

104 Didasc. 3.10 (Buttimer, , 58–60; Taylor, , 92–93).Google Scholar

105 Zinn, , “Hugh of St. Victor and the Art of Memory” (n. 4 above), 211–34.Google Scholar

106 Stock, Brian, The Implications of Literacy: Written Language and Models of Interpretation in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries (Princeton, 1983), 87.Google Scholar

10 De arca Noe mystica 9 (PL 176:696D–697A): “A frigore occidentis juxta pedem primae scalae quidam de caverna obvoluta facie prodiens corruit, et in lapidem offendens, vas quod portat confringit, ad exprimendam ignorantiam, quae per varios errores animae integritatem dissipat.” Google Scholar

108 Ibid. (PL 176:697A–B): “Post haec in eadem scala cognitio erecta pingitur contra volumen, quod deorsum extenta manu porrigitur, et iuxta eam fragmenta vasis. In hoc volumine, sicut diximus, scriptum est: ‘In principio fecit Deus coelum et terram’ (Gen. 1:1), quia primo cognitio Dei in creaturis est. In secunda scala meditatio sedens exprimitur, et colligens fragmenta vasis fracti. In tertia scala contemplatio formatur ad similitudinem fabri, conflans eadem fragmenta, ita ut liquefactio per ductum coloris (quem superius iuxta versum hujus scalae sursum porreximus) quasi per fistulam in medium cubitum, quasi in monetam currere videatur. Propter hoc mysterium, quia integritatem animae, quam ignorantia frangit, cognitio invenit, meditatio colligit, contemplatio per ignem divini amoris liquefaciendo in monetam divinae similitudinis reformandam fundit.” Cf. Zinn, , “De gradibus ascensionum” (n. 4 above), 74–75.Google Scholar

109 De arca Noe morali 4.9 (PL 176:680B–C; CSVM, 152): “Ibi elucent occulta, ibi operosa apparent facilia, et quae per se videri poterant minus congrua, in ordine suo considerata probantur idonea. Ibi quoddam universitatis corpus effingitur, et concordia singulorum explicatur. Ibi alter quidam mundus huic praetereunti et transitorio contrarius invenitur, quia ea quae in hoc mundo per diversa tempora transeunt, in illo mundo quasi in quodam aeternitatis statu simul consistunt…. Et ideo fortassis, dixit Apostolus: ‘Praeterit figura hujus mundi’ (1 Cor. 7:31), forma hujus mundi, species hujus mundi, pulchritudo hujus mundi, qui est alter mundus, cujus figura non praeterit, cujus forma non transit, cujus species non marcescit, cujus pulchritudo non deficit.” Regarding the deceptive quality of this world's beauty, see ibid. 4.8 (PL 176:676A; CSVM, 145): “Ideo ergo mundus in sacra Scriptura maledicitur, ideo inimicus Dei appellatur, videlicet non quia substantia mundi mala sit, sed quia pulchritudo mundi animas seducit.” Google Scholar

110 Hugonis de Sancto Victore De Archa Noe Libellus de Formatione Arche (n. 73 above), 117: “Nunc igitur ipsius arche nostre exemplar proponamus, sicut promisimus, quod exterius depingimus, ut foris discas quid intus agere debeas, ut cum huius exemplaris formam in corde tuo expresseris domum Dei in te edificatam esse leteris.” Google Scholar

111 Stock, , Implications of Literacy , 324.Google Scholar

112 Didasc. 5.6 (Buttimer, , 105; Taylor, , 128).Google Scholar

113 De arca Noe morali 1.1 (PL 176:620A; CSVM, 48): “Quaeramus ergo quo ad amorem Dei pertingere possimus, quia ipse colliget, et stabilitet corda nostra.” Google Scholar

114 Stock, , Implications of Literacy , 323.Google Scholar