Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-04T09:30:21.409Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Oculus Sacerdotis and Some Other Works of William of Pagula

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

L. E. Boyle
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

One of the results of the Fourth Lateran Council in 1215 was a heightening of interest in the cure of souls, and the years that followed the Council saw a generous effort on the part of prelates to provide, in accordance with the Lateran directives, a better–educated clergy who could bring the laity to a reasonable understanding of the essentials of Christian belief and practice. In England, during the reign of Henry III, nearly every diocese contributed to the movement for reform, chiefly by statutes modelled upon or deriving from decrees of Innocent III's great council. The Council of Oxford in 1222, the Council and Constitutions of the Legate Otto at London in 1237 and of the Legate Ottobono at London in 1268, catered in varying degrees for the Church in England as a whole.

Type
Research Article
Information
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society , Volume 5 , January 1955 , pp. 81 - 110
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Historical Society 1955

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

page 81 note 1 Cf. Gibbs, M. and Lang, J., Bishops and Reform, 1215–1272 (Oxford, 1934), especially pp. 94–179Google Scholar; and, for the synodal statutes of the period, Cheney, C. R., English Synodalia of the Thirteenth Century (Oxford, 1941)Google Scholar.

page 81 note 1 Wilkins, D., Concilia Magnae Britanniae et Hiberniae (London, 1737),ii 54–6Google Scholar. The outline occupies a chapter of the Lambeth Constitutions to which Wilkins gives the tide De Informatione Simplicium. We shall refer to die outline by its incipit: Ignorantia Sacerdotum.

page 82 note 1 Thus, as late as 1520, an Oxford bookseller, John Dorne, may be seen doing a steady trade in an English adaptation of the outline called the Exhonoratorium Curatorum, thirty copies of which were sold during about ten months of that year. Cf. Madan, F., The Daily Ledger of John Dorne, 1520 (Oxford Historical Society, Collectanea, i. 1885)Google Scholar, where the entries for the period are printed pp. 79–138.

page 82 note 2 E.g. Deanesly, M., The Lollard Bible (Cambridge, 1920), p. 196Google Scholar; Douie, D., John Pecham (Oxford, 1952), p. 138Google Scholar. Barlow, F., reviewing Miss Douie's book (Journal of Ecclesiastical History iv (1953), 229–30)Google Scholar, calls it ‘a handbook for confessors’ akin to the Summula of Quivil.

page 81 note 3 The Templum Domini is extant in some 70 manuscripts, 65 of which have been listed by Thomson, S. H., The Writings of Robert Grosseteste (Cambridge, 1940), pp. 138–40Google Scholar.

page 82 note 4 I.e. the ten commandments and the seven deadly sins. The text is printed in Wilkins, , Concilia, ii 162–8Google Scholar.In the prologue Quivil states his purpose: ‘… insufficientia presbyterorum saecularium confessiones audientium compatiens … praesentem summulam eisdem assigno ut earn sciant ad utilitatem suam et confitentium’. Although Miss Douie, , John Pecham, pp. 138–9Google Scholar, says that Quivil used the Pecham programme ‘as the source of the little Summa, the programme and the Summula differ in character and purpose.

page 83 note 1 Thus the first catalogue of Dover Priory (James, M. R., Ancient Libraries of Canterbury and Dover (Cambridge, 1903), p. 418, nos. 95, 96)Google Scholartwice describes as Pars Oculi what the second catalogue (ibid., p. 445) reveals to be all three parts of the Oculus Sacerdotis.

page 83 note 2 The Oculus Moralis is ascribed to Grosseteste in many fourteenth-century MSS. listed in Thomson, , Writings of Robert Grosseteste, pp. 256–7Google Scholar, and to Pecham in one MS. of the next century. The colophon of the Augsburg edition of 1477 reads: ‘Tractatus (Johannis Pitsham Archiepiscopi Cantuariensis)…’ For Petrus de Lacepiera (Pierre de Limoges), cf. Spettmann, H., ‘Das Schriften “De Oculo Morali” and sein Verfasser’, Arch. Franc. Hist., xvi (1923), 309–22Google Scholar.

page 83 note 3 De Oculo Morali, Augsburg (A. Sorg), 1477, fo. II: ‘… in nobis duplex oculus: intellectus videlicet et affectus… Oculum intellectus illuminat veritas, oculum affectus caritas. … Sed in multis sinister oculus multum illuminatus est cum dexter sit obscuratus … O quot sunt hodie … qui multum intendunt circa quaestiones sed modicum circa mores’.

page 84 note 1 It is called ‘quoddam additamentum Oculi Sacerdotis’ in MS. Balliol College 86, fo. 231r, and on occasion is found as a fourth part of the Oculus, as in MS. 249, Guildhall, London.

page 84 note 2 Oculus Pastoralis sive Libellus erudiens futurum rectorem populorum anonymo auctore conscriptus circiter annum 1222, in Muratori, L. A., Antiquitates Italicae Medii Aevi, ix (1776), 792–858Google Scholar.

page 84 note 3 Davis, H. W. C., ‘The Canon Law in England’, Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung f. Rechtsgeschichte, xxxiv (1914), 349–50Google Scholar, reprinted in J. R. Weaver and A. L. Poole, H. W. C. Davis, A memoir (London, 1933), pp. 123–43.

page 85 note 1 ‘Modus tamen et ordo tractandi ob quorundam in eo contentorum inordinatam replicationem non videtur doctrinaliter ordinatus’: Pupilla Oculi, London (impensis Bretton), 1510Google Scholar, fo. iir.

page 85 note 2 MS. Corpus Christi College, Oxford, 145, fos. 121r ff.: ‘Incipit libellus qui dicitur Pupilla Oculi summarie compilatus.…’ The text itself begins with the prologue to the Pars Oculi: ‘Cum ecclesiae quibus praeficiuntur personae minus idoneae.…’

page 86 note 1 Myrc, J., Instructions for Parish Priests, ed. Peacock, E. (Early English Texts Society, Old Series, xxxi, 1868), 11. 976–1096, 1107–1286Google Scholar, etc.

page 86 note 2 Pars Oculi, MS. New College 292, fos. 8v–IIr: Thomas de Chabham, Summa (MS. Oriel College 17), Pars VIIa, cc. 114, 127, 128, 130, 131, 140, 170, 175, 185, 186. For Master Thomas de Chabham, subdean of Salisbury between about 1208 and 1228, cf. Russell, J. C., Dictionary of writers of thirteenth-century England (Bulletin of Institute of Historical Research, special supplement no. 3, London, 1936), pp. 158–9Google Scholar; and Teetaert, A., La confession aux laiques dans l'église latine (Paris, 1926), pp. 347–51Google Scholar.It is not generally known, however, that he was also perpetual vicar of Sturminster Marshall, Dorset, between 1206 and about 1220 (Muniments of the Dean and Chapter, Salisbury, Press 4, Box C, doc. 4, 5).

page 87 note 1 ‘Et licet animae hominum pretiosiores omnibus aliis rebus et corporibus ‘… ipsae tamen animae per praelatos et sacerdotes minus idoneos multi-pliciter sunt deceptae, prout experientia didici in officio poenitentiarii constitutus. Nam multoties scivi et inveni quamplures sacerdotes parochiales errasse in modo confessionis audiendae et etiam in absolutione inpendenda ac etiam in poenitentiis iniungendis, et absolventes parochianos suos de facto quos absolvere non possunt de iure … et in multis casibus mittentes eos poenitentiariis episcoporum in quibus ipsi sacerdotes absolvere possunt bene. Et sic quandoque propter negligentiam parochianorum et ignorantiam presbiterorum remanebant quidam parochiani per annum et ultra non absoluti de peccatis de quibus idem sacerdos parochialis absolvere possit … et hoc propter iuris ignorantiam quae non poterit eos excusare cum nulli sacerdotum liceat poenitentiales canones ignorare nec quicquam facere quod patrum regulis possit obviare: XXXVIII D, 1, 2 et 3, et cap: Nulli Sacerdotum.… Valde tamen necessarium est sacerdotibus parochialibus scire poenitentias in canonibus diffinitas, ut sic scire possint pro maioribus peccatis maiorem poenitentiam inponere,… et casus in quibus absolvere non possunt.… Et quia in praedicitis quamplures scio errare, (cupio) … quantum possum Dei gratia eos … ab huiusmodi erroribus revocare…’ (MS. New College 292, fo. 2r–2v.)

page 87 note 2 MS. New College 292, fos. 13r–27v.

page 88 note 1 There were, of course, many excommunication-lists current in the thirteenth century in England, but few of the range of the Pars Oculi catalogue. In passing, we may mention Grosseteste's use of the excommunications pronounced at the Council of Oxford in 1222 in his constitutions (Roberti Grosseteste Epistolae, ed. Luard, H. R. (Rolls Series, 1861), pp. 162–4)Google Scholar; and his ‘Casus quibus excommunicatur ipso iure’, etc., in the Templum Domini (MS. Rawl. A 384, fo. 101).

page 88 note 2 Sarum, Manuale, 1523Google Scholar, fo. cxxv, quoted by Wordsworth, C., Ceremonies and Processions of the Cathedral Church of Salisbury (Cambridge, 1901), pp. 252–3Google Scholar.

page 88 note 3 ‘Ne quis igitur praelatus seu sacerdos parochialis de hiis per aliqualem ignorantiam se excuset, omnia praecipua quae per canones (et) constitutiones provinciales praecipiuntur parochianis exponi et inter parochianos in ecclesia praedicari in hac modica summa breviter et faciliter continentur’(MS. New College 292, fo. 35r).

page 89 note 1 Poore's constitutions (ed. Macray, W. D., Charters and Documents of Salisbury (Rolls Series, 1891), pp. 128–63)Google Scholarare cited once, and those of Bingham (B.M. Harl. MS. 52, fos. 119v–126r) at least four times. Indeed, the sequence of this section of the Dextera Pars seems to be closely related to that of Bingham's ‘quae sunt principalia sacramenta et quot propter simpliciores’.

page 89 note 2 Lines 69–86, 119–263, 304–403.

page 89 note 3 Two excommunications from the Decretum, three from the Decretals, eight from the Sext, six from the Clementines; two from the Lambeth Council of Boniface of Savoy in 1261, one from the constitutions of the Legate Ottobono in 1268, one from the Reading Council of Pecham in 1279 and eleven from his Lambeth Council of 1281.

page 89 note 4 Wilkins, , Concilia, ii 413–15Google Scholar, but with two notable alterations: the two references in the Dextera Pars to the Speculum Praelatorum become references to the Pupilla Oculi (written 1384).

page 90 note 1 Of the instances of this which have been noted to date, the more interesting are five to which Cheney's, C. R.English Synodalia (p. 147; and pp. 112, 115Google Scholar) has drawn our attention. In each of these instances the extract from the Dextera Pars, which Professor Cheney describes as ‘a short series of instructions to parish priests’ and of uncertain origin, is found accompanying, or as an appendix to, the Pupilla Oculi of de Burgh. For the extract represents one of the sections of the Oculus which de Burgh, in revising it, had omitted or redistributed. In fact, the extract may really be an appendix to the Pupilla: some of the Salisbury references have been dropped, several points are abbreviated and the reader referred to the Pupilla, and, as in the work referred to in the preceding note, references to the Speculum Praelatorum are replaced by references to the Pupilla.

page 90 note 2 Lyndwood, W., Provinciale (Oxford, 1679), pp. 1–8Google Scholar. Myrc, , Instructions, II. 454–525Google Scholar, represents the Dextera Pars on the articles of faith.

page 90 note 3 Cf. Allen, H. E., The Writings ascribed to Richard Rolle (New York, London 1927), pp. 101–4Google Scholar.Miss Allen's dating of Rolle's treatise ante 1322 may be a few years out, since Judica B2 uses the Pars Oculi, which appears to have been written about 1327–9.

page 91 note 1 ‘Ignorantia mater errorum cunctorum maxime in sacerdotibus vitanda est, qui docendi officium in populo Dei susceperunt’(CIC, ed. Friedberg, A., Leipzig, , 1879, i. 141)Google Scholar.Pecham's words are: ‘Ignorantia sacerdotum populum praecipitat in foveam erroris …’ (Wilkins, , Concilia, ii. 54)Google Scholar. Cf. the preamble to Quivil's synodal statutes of 1287, where the Decretum passage is repeated almost ad verbum (ibid., ii. 143).

page 91 note 2 ‘Giraldus Cambrensis might laugh, and Pecham and Grosseteste groan, at the illiteracy of the parish clergy, but it is only fair to remember that the facilities for receiving any sort of education were very meagre’ (Moorman, J. R. H., Church Life in England in the thirteenth century (Cambridge, 1946), p. 94)Google Scholar.

page 92 note 1 Cf. Legg, J. Wickham, Tracts on the Mass (Henry Bradshaw Society, xxvii, 1904), pp. 270–4Google Scholar.

page 92 note 2 MS. New College 292, fo. 94.

page 93 note 1 The specialized literature of the thirteenth century is discussed in Arnould, E. J., Le Manuel des Péchés (Paris, 1940), pp. 1–59Google Scholar; and that of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries in Pfander, H. G., ‘Some medieval manuals of instruction in England and observations on Chaucer's “Parson's Tale”’, Journal of English and Germanic Philology, xxxv (1936), 243–58Google Scholar.

page 93 note 2 Although the Summa ‘Cum miserationes’ of Thomas de Chabham, subdean of Salisbury, and perpetual vicar of Sturminster, is professedly ‘de poenitentia’, it ranges beyond the confines of manuals such as Raymund of Peñafort's Summa de Casibus, including, for instance, a chapter on the conduct of priests which begins ‘Est etiam offcium periculosum officium sacerdotum vel aliorum clericorum habentium curas animarum, et tamen nesciunt animas regere vel, si sciunt, negligunt’ (MS. Oriel College 17, fo. 60r).

page 93 note 3 It is perhaps unfair to include Thomas de Chabham in this general statement since he was writing before the wave of pastoral legislation had gathered force: no doubt he was composing his Summa about the same time as his diocesan, Richard Poore, was framing his synodal statutes, but, as Professor Cheney says, ‘whether one stimulated the other to write it is impossible to say’ (English Synodalia, p. 54). Chabham, however, senses the importance of a knowledge of local excommunications: ‘secundum diversas regiones sunt diversi canones et diversae institutiones latae sententiae, ut in aliquibus regionibus vel episcopatibus excommunicati sunt ipso facto omnes sortiarii et omnes sortiarie et omnes qui pervertunt testimonia defunctorum et omnes falsi testes et omnes usurarii … Unde oportet quod quilibet sacerdos sciat constitutiones synodales factas in episcopatu suo …’ (MS. Oriel College 17, fo.50v). The synodal excommunications instanced bear a marked resemblance to those in Poore's synodal constitutions (cap. xlix).

page 94 note 1 Watkin, A., ed., Archdeaconry of Norwich, Inventory of Church Goods temp. Edward III. (Norfolk Record Society, xix, 1947), ii. p. xlviiiGoogle Scholar. Copies at Thwaite, Sall, Stiffkey St. John, Mileham, Gayton Thorpe, Tilney All Saints, Dersingham, West Newton, Merton, Swanton Abbot, Ashby.

page 94 note 2 ‘A fifteenth-century library list’, Records of Buckinghamshire, xii (1927–1933), 365–7Google Scholar. Mordon died in 1410.

page 94 note 3 Will of Roger Shirreve, clerk, of St. Martin (near Ludgate?), proved 1392: Sharpe, R. R., Calendar of Wills proved and enrolled in the Court of Husting (London, 1889), ii. 296–7Google Scholar.

page 95 note 1 E.g. the will of Ralph Busby, vicar of the parochial church of Great Baddow, dated 1492: Malden, H. C., ‘Ancient Wills: 2’. Trans. Essex Archeological Society, vi (1896), 122Google Scholar; and that of Mawdesley, Thomas, clerk of Myddleton, , 1554: History of the Chantries I (Chetham Society, lix, 1872), 123–4Google Scholar. The copy of the Oculus in the Dean and Chapter Library, Canterbury (MS. D. 8), belonged, the flyleaf tells us, to Dom. W. Ingram, ‘penit(entiarius) ecclesiae … Cant' olim’. A note in pencil on the MS. states that Ingram was penitentiary from 1511–1532.

page 95 note 2 …‘precursores nostri quidam zelo animarum permoti de his que regimen animarum concernunt sententias seu tractatus varios contexerunt, inter quos ille qui sacerdotis oculus intitulatur ceteris communior … (nostrum compendium) quia de predicto tractatu qui dicitur Oculus Sacerdotis pro magna parte excerptum … Pupillam Oculi censui nuncupandum’ (de Burgh, J., Pupilla Oculi, London, 1510, fo. ii).Google Scholar

page 95 note 3 The purpose of the Cilium Oculi is clear enough, e.g. (on reserved censures): ‘Sunt autem casus episcopales sufficienter recitati in Oculo Sacerdotis … Item, casus papales in eodem libro satis patent praeter quos hos duos iniungendos decrevi…’ (MS. Balliol College 86, fo. 232V), but whether the work is by the author of the Oculus Sacerdotis or by some con-temporary is not easy to decide. Certainly it would seem to have been written within the period 1330–40.

page 95 note 4 ‘Incipit liber qui vocatur Animarum Regimen compilatus in anno Domini millesimo tricentesimo quadragesimo tertio. O vos omnes sacer–dotes qui laboratis onerati et curati animarum attendite et videte libellumistum. … Compilavi enim hoc opusculum ex quibusdam libris, videlicet, Summa Summarum, Raymundi, Summa Confessorum, Veritatis Theologiae, Pars Oculi Sacerdotis, et de libro venerabilis Anselmi De Concordia Praescientiae et Praedestinatione et Gratiae Dei cum Libero Arbitrio ….’ (MS. Hatton ii, fo. 4r).

page 96 note 1 The full William of Pagula entry in Boston's Catalogus will be given in the next note but one. But it may be noted here that a century after, and, perhaps, independently of, Boston, the catalogue of the books of Syon Monastery explicitly ascribes the three copies of the Oculus Sacerdotis that the monastery possessed to ‘Magister Willelmus de Pagula’ (Catalogue of the Library of Syon Monastery, Isleworth, ed. Bateson, M., Cambridge, 1898, p. 188, nos. T. 11, T. 32, T. 43).Google Scholar

page 96 note 2 Coxe, H. O., Catalogus Codicum Manuscriptorum… (Oxford, 1852)Google Scholar, e.g. MS. New College 292; Trinity 18.

page 96 note 3 Boston of Bury apud Tanner, T., Bibliotheca Britannico-Hibernica (London, 1748), introduction, p. x1Google Scholar:

Wilhelmus de Pagula, vicarius de Wingfeld, prope forestam de Windesor, floruit A.C. … et scripsit

Summam Summarum de jure canonico pariter et divino et continet

lib. v. Pr. Ad honorem. Fin.respondendum.

Speculum Prelatorum.

Speculum Religiosorum. Pr.Accipite. Fin. passionem Christi.

Summam quae dicitur Oculus Sacerdotis. Pr.Ignorantia. Fin.coronam vitae.

Ad regem Angliae Edwardum iii epist. i.

From this entry Bale, Tanner (op. cit., p. 570) and later writers derive their basic information about William of Pagula. But in Bale's case there are some curious discrepancies. Here, for instance, Boston, in listing the Oculus, gives the incipit of the Sinistra Pars only. Bale, in his Index (Index Britanniae Scriptorum, ed. Poole, R. L. and Bateson, M., Oxford, 1902, p. 143)Google Scholar, repeats

page 97 note 1 A few examples of interdependence may be noted here. The MSS. quoted are as follows.Oculus Sacerdotis: MS. New College 292; Summa Summarum: MS. Bodley 293; Speculum Praelatorum: MS. Merton College 217; Speculum Religiosorum: MS. Gray's Inn Library 11.

page 98 note 1 ‘De huius missae expositione …tractavi ad plenum in modica summula sacramentali quae vocatur Sinistra Pars Oculi Saeerdotis eodem titulo. Sed plenius de hoc tractabo in Speculo Praelatorum …’ (MS. Laud. misc. 624, fo. 108v; MS. Exeter College 19, fo. 182V; MS. Christ's College 2, fo. 109V; MS. Pembroke College (Cambridge) 201, fo. 189r. But other MSS. abbreviate the passage and speak impersonally: ‘De hac materia tractatur ad plenum in quadam nova summa quae vocatur Speculum Praelatorum’ (MS. Bodley 293, fo. 144V; MS. Magdalen College 134, fo. 172V; MS. Royal 10 D x, fo. 179VJ MS. Harl. 5014–5, fo. 164V; MS. Edinburgh University Library 136, fo. 157r; MS. Worcester Cathedral Library F131, fo. 213r; MS. Durham Cathedral Library C. 11.13, fo. I43r).

page 98 note 2 The sequence and dating of the five works are considered briefly in Appendix A infra.

page 98 note 3 ‘nomen collectoris exprimere nolo ne collectio vilescerit cognito collectore’ (MS. Bodley 293, fo. IV).

page 98 note 4 ‘Sed quid si per alia etiam rescripto contenta constat de persona mea, ut impetrat contra me W(illelmum) doctorem iure canonico …’ (MS. Bodley 293, fo. 25r; MS. Pembroke College (Cambridge) 201, fo. 32V; and all other MSS.).

page 98 note 5 Cf. the prologue to the Pars Oculi supra p. 87, n. 1.

page 99 note 1 Because the only synodal constitutions he quotes are those of Salisbury bishops, e.g. Oculus Sacerdotis, MS. New College 292, fo. 35V; Speculum Praelatorum, MS. Merton College 217, fo. 142V; and cf. p. 89, n. 1, supra. The Summa Summarum (MS. Bodley 293, fo. 25r) says that he does not belong to the diocese of Lincoln.

page 99 note 2 Cf. Appendix A (IV) infra.

page 99 note 3 MS. Christ's College 2, fo. 269r. Cf. James, M. R., A descriptive catalogue of the manuscripts in the library of Christ's College Cambridge (Cambridge, 1905), pp. 2–3Google Scholar, where the above note, to which Mr. R. B. Bartle first drew my attention, is printed. ‘De Pabula’ seems near enough to ‘de Pagula’ to allow the conclusion that this is Boston's William of Pagula.

page 99 note 4 Registrum Simonis de Gandavo, ed. Flower, C. T. and Dawes, M. C. B. (Canterbury and York Society, 1934), p. 822Google Scholar.This may be the same William of Pagula, clerk, to whom Archbishop Greenfield of York granted letters dimissory in November 1313 (Register of William Greenfield, ed. Brown, W. and Thompson, A. Hamilton (Surtees Society, cli. 1936), iii. 197–8)Google Scholar, although the prevalence of the name Pagula or of its variants, Poul, Paul, Pole, Pawel, in fourteenth-century Yorkshire makes it unwise to press the identification. Thus Willelmus de Sancto Paulo or William Paul, Carmelite and bishop of Meath (1327–49), was also known as Willelmus de Pagula, and has in fact been confused by some bibliographers with Boston's de Pagula (Pitseus, J., De rebus anglicis, Paris, 1619)Google Scholar, though not in his notice of Pagula, the parish priest (s.a. 1350, p. 476), which otherwise copies Bale, but in his notice of Pagula, the bishop (s.a. 1280, p. 363): ‘Guilhelmus Paghamus (alius ab illo qui Paghanerus seu de Pagula dicitur, et circa annum Domini 1350, floruit)…’

page 100 note 1 Salisbury Diocesan Registry, Reg. Mortival, ii, fo. 132r: ‘Poenitentiarii constituti in Archidiaconatu Berk’ 8 id. Mar. 1321, et anno consecrationis nostne VIP… Decanatus Radyngg tantum: Magister Willelmus de Pagula Vicarius de Wynkefeld. (‘Add. later hand: Postmodum habet potestatem per totum archidiaconatum Berk’.)

page 100 note 2 Muniments of the Dean and Chapter, Salisbury, Press 4, Box E, doc. 2.6: ‘In vigilia Sancti Iacobi Apostoli anno domini 1325 presentibus Domino Willelmo Poul perpetuo vicario Wynkefeld.…’

page 100 note 3 Reg. Wyvil ii, fo. 19r ‘Iohannes de Lavyngton presbyterus admissus ad vicariam de Wynkefeld …

page 100 note 4 ‘Sed quid si per alia etiam rescripto contenta constat de persona mea, ut impetrat contra me W(illelmum) doctorem iure canonico legentem Oxon. et canonicum Sancti Pauli London., et sic per huiusmodi indicia constat de persona mea, an valeat rescriptum?’ (MS. Bodley 293, fo. 25r, and the ten other MSS. that are extant in England.)

page 101 note 1 There are many indications that Pagula had two or more of the works in hand at the same time, the most interesting of which is that in a manuscript of the Summa Summarum at Pembroke College, Cambridge (MS. 201, fo. 189: ‘De expositione Missae’): ‘De huius missae expositione …tractavi ad plenum in modica summula sacramentali quae vocatur Sinistra Pars Oculi Sacerdotis … sed plenius de hoc tractabo in Speculo Praelatorum … rubrica De officio celebrantis Missam, per totum. De officiis autem divinis … tractabitur ibidem in rubrica proxima praecedenti per totum. Quae omnia nondum adhuc plenum complevi in quibus et in aliis iuvet nos Omnipotens Deus.’ (Cf. p. 98, supra.)

page 101 note 2 In his Septuplum (1346), MS. Gonville & Caius Coll. 282, fos. 129r, 136r, a work written after his famous Glossa.

page 101 note 3 Testamenta Eboracensia (Surtees Soc, xlv. 1864), iii. 1Google Scholar:will of John de Scardeburgh, notary public, 1395.

page 101 note 4 Register of Chichele, Henry, ed. Jacob, E. F. (Oxford, 1938), ii. 487:‘Similiter lego unum librum qui vocatur Summa Summarum precii vi marcarum … cum cathena ferrea in choro ecclesie ipsius prioratus (Sancte Margarete virginis iuxta Marleburgh’)Google Scholar aut in alio loco magis ad hoc apto perpetuo ligandum et inibi sub pena anathematis perpetuo, remansurum et scribatur in primo folio nomen conferentis et causa.' Polton, who was at the Council of Basle from the end of 1432 until his death in 1433, may have been responsible for introducing John Nider, prior of the Dominican convent there in this period, to the Summa Summarum which Nider seemingly knew when he was writing his Manuale Confessorum between 1434 and 1438.Cf. Nider, J., Johannis Nider ordinis predicatorum Manuale Confessorum… (Paris, 1477), fos. 6–9Google Scholar. Miss B. Smalley has kindly drawn my attention to the unexpected use of the Summa Summarum in thePostilla in Mattheum of the famous Carmelite doctor, John Baconthorpe, which would appear to have been written about 1340.

page 102 note 1 MS. Merton College 217. The actual text takes up 449 folios, the remainder consisting of an index, etc. Twenty–eight chapters of Part 2 are missing, and were not in the exemplar from which this copy was made: cf. fo. 179V, where the copyist writes ‘Hie deficit de exemplari’.

page 102 note 2 MS. Merton College 217, fos. 180r–449r, the third part of the Speculum. Besides themata (four or more) for every Sunday, festival and possible occasion of the liturgical year (fos. 180r–248r), there is an excellent set of sermon Distinctiones (Aperire–Zelus: fos. 248r–449r) from which the themata could be filled out.

page 102 note 3 For a description of the manuscripts and a list of the contents of these collections see the introduction to Chapters of the Black Monks ed. Pantin, W. A. (Camden Society, 3rd ser., xlvii, 1933), ii, pp. viii–xviiGoogle Scholar.The Speculum Religiosorum, in its original form, accompanies only one of these collections; but the treatise Abbas vel Prior, which accompanies four of the others and was formerly thought to be a work of Uthred of Boldon, has turned out to be a rearrangement of the Speculum. The rearrangement was probably made before 1336, and thus before Uthred's day as a writer, since it makes no attempt to correlate the Constitutions of Benedict XII (1336) with the earlier legislation (Legatine Constitutions to Clementines) which the Speculum Religiosorum embodies.

page 103 note 1 The whole of the Stimulus Amoris of James of Milan has been incorporated into the Speculum Praelatorum: the greater part of it occupies the second chapter of Part 1 entirely (MS. Merton College 217, fos.iir–30V: De contemplatione; while the section on predestination appears in the middle of the first chapter, De fide, fo. 5r–v), which otherwise is composed of extracts from the popular Summa Theologkae Veritatis of Hugh of Strassburg. The Stimulus Amoris has been edited in the series Bibliotheca Franciscana Ascetica iv (Quaracchi, 1905)Google Scholar, and may also be found printed among the works of StBonaventure, (Opera omnia, Paris (Vives), 1868, xii)Google Scholar.The Summa Theologkae Veritatis circulated in the middle ages as a work of Albert the Great, St. Thomas or St. Bonaventure, and is to be found printed in the Vives edition of the opera omnia of each of these three writers.

page 103 note 2 Cf. Diet. Thiol. Cathol., viii (i), 1924, 761–2Google Scholar,s.v. Jean de Fribourg (M. D. Chenu).

page 103 note 3 These three authorities appear passim in the Oculus Sacerdotis, Speculum Praelatorum and Summa Summarum as they do also in many fourteenth–century works of general theology and canon law. I hope to prove later that the source of many quotations from these authorities in works of popular theology is the Summa Confessorum which, written about 1280–98, revised the Summa de casibus of Raymund of Peñnafort, and, by an adroit use of the latest theological knowledge, gave the Summa de Casibus a new lease of life. Cf. John of Freiburg's prologue to his Summa printed in Summa Confessorum reverendis patris Iohannis de Friburgo (Lyons, 1518)Google Scholar.

page 103 note 4 Cf. Edwards, K., ‘Bishops and learning in the reign of Edward II’, Church Quarterly Review, cxxxviii (1944), 66–72, 78–9Google Scholar.

page 103 note 5 Reg. S. de Gandavo, p. 822.

page 104 note 1 Cf. Reg. S. de Gandavo, pp. 180–4, 513

page 104 note 2 A treatise which is well known from Bishop Stubbs' use of it. Cf. Stubbs, W., Constitutional History of England (4th edition, Oxford, 1896), ii. 394, 423, 564, 567Google Scholar. Usually the Speculum is ascribed to Simon Islip, but we here accept Professor Tait's suggestion that Simon Mepham is a more likely author: cf. appendix A (IV), infra.

page 104 note 3 Boston of Bury as quoted by Bale, , Scriptorum Illustrium Maioris Brytanniae Summarium (Basle, 1559), p. 448Google Scholar. Cf. pp. 96–7, n., supra.

page 105 note 1 Cf. van Hove, A., Prologomena ad Codicem Juris Canonici (2nd ed.Malines, , 1945)Google Scholarfor Willelmus de Monte Lauduno (p. 482) and Zenzelinus de Cassanis (p. 475). For the date of Iohannes Andreae, cf. Schulte, J. F., Die Geschichte der Quellen und Literatur des canonischen Rechts (Stuttgart, 1877), ii. 217Google Scholar.

page 105 note 2 Cf. supra, p. 98, n. 1.

page 105 note 3 Cf. supra, p. 101, n. 1.

page 105 note 4 For example, in a chapter ‘De Imperatore et eius electione’ Pagula asks the question ‘Quid iuramentum debet imperator facere papae’ and answers ‘Die quod tale iuramentum: “Tibi Domino Iohanni Papae, ego, talis, promitto et iuro. …”’ (MS. Bodley 293, fo. 18r). The contrast between the definite ‘John’ (XXII) and talis suggests that Pagula was writing while the issue between the rival claimants for the empire declared vacant by John XXII was still undecided, and before Lewis of Bavaria emerged victorious in 1322.

page 106 note 1 Cf. Speculum Religiosorum (MS. Egerton 746, fo. 84r): ‘De ceteris peccatis mortalibus…quaere in summa quae vocatur Oculus Sacerdotis scilicet in Dextera Parte’.

page 106 note 2 Salisbury Diocesan Registry, Reg. Mortival II, fo. 243r: ‘…Statuta in concilio provinciali ad diem veneris post festum conversionis Sancti Pauli Londoniis convocata edita suscepimus sub sigillo venerabilis patris Domini Simonis., continentia seriem hanc verborum “Zelari oportet”, etc. Cum igitur parum prosit statuta condere nisi fiat executio eorumdem vobis et vestrum singulis auctoritate dicti concilii et ex dicti patris iniunctione firmiter iniungendo committimus et mandamus quatenus copiam praesentium absque mora assumentes, et statuta praedicta et praesertim ea in quibus maioris excommunicationis sententiam contrarium facientes incurrunt, vos … in vestris capitulis … et singulis ecclesiis infra iurisdictionem vestram consistentibus cum maior populi affuerit multitudo diebus dominicis et festivis solemniter et intelligibiliter…publicantes …’

page 107 note 1 Moisant, J., De Speculo Regis Edwardi III…quern…conscripsit Simon Islip (Paris, 1891)Google Scholar.The ‘first recension’ is printed pp. 83–123.

page 107 note 2 Tait, J., ‘On the date and authorship of the “Speculum Regis Edward”’, English Historical Review, lxi (1901), 110–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

page 107 note 3 Professor Tait and M. Moisant were not aware of this ascription.

page 107 note 1 E.g.: ‘O domine mi rex, erubesce et contremisce quando a te petuntur huiusmodi litterae protectionis…illi de familia tua capiunt de foresta de Widesore et locis vicinis homines carectas et equos pauperum et compellunt eos, recedere a domibus propriis…et ibi carriare boscum…’ (Epistola, ed. Moisant, , p. 100)Google Scholar; ‘…et de hoc, fit magnus clamor populi, in partibus de Windesore, ubi traxisti originem’… (ibid. p. 106).