The Oldest Epitome of Augustine`s Tractatus in Euangelium loannis

Revue des Études Augustiniennes, 43 (1997), p. 63-103
The Oldest Epitome of Augustine's Tractatus in Euangelium
loannis and Commentaries on the Gospel of John
in the Early Middle Ages
As the Carolingian revival of learning got underway, the voluminous works
of the patristic period were still circulating in many abbreviated versions1. The
1. Abbreviations used here:
Β ISCHOFF, M LAC = Bernhard BISCHOFF, Manuscripts and Libraries in the Age of
Charlemagne, trans. Michael GORMAN (Cambridge, 1994).
BISCHOFF, «Wendepunkte» = Bernhard BISCHOFF, «Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der
lateinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter», Sacris Erudiri 6 (1954), p. 189-279 ; rep.
Mittelalterliche Studien 1 (Stuttgart, 1966), p. 205-273 ; «Turning-Points in the History of
Latin Exegesis in the Early Middle Ages», trans. Colm O'GRADY, Biblical Studies : The
Medieval Irish Contribution, Proceedings of the Irish Biblical Association 1, ed. Martin
MCNAMARA (Dublin, 1976), p. 73-160.
CANTELLI = Silvia CANTELLI, «La genesi redazionale del commentario di Alcuino di York al
Vangelo di Giovanni e il codice Sankt Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek 258», Immagini del Medioevo,
Centro per il collegamento degli Studi medievali ed umanistici in Umbria 13 (Spoleto, 1994),
p. 23-49 with 4 plates of St Gall 258 and St Gall 275.
KELLY = Joseph F. KELLY, «A Catalogue of early medieval Hiberno-Latin biblical
commentaries», Traditio 44 (1988), p. 537-571, 45 (1989-1990), p. 393-434.
LAPIDGE & SHARPE = Michael LAPIDGE and Richard SHARPE, A Bibliography of CelticLatin Literature, 400-1200 (Dublin, 1985).
SCHÖNBACH = A. E. SCHÖNBACH, «Über einige Evangelienkommentare des Mittelalters»,
Sitzungsberichte der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, phil.-hist. Klasse 146/4 (1903),
176 pp.
STEGMÜLLER = Friedrich STEGMÜLLER, Repertorium Biblicum Medii Aeui, 11 vols.,
(Madrid, 1950-1980).
WRIGHT 1972 = David F. WRIGHT, «The Manuscripts of St. Augustine's Tractatus in
Euangelium Iohannis: A Preliminary Survey and Check List», Recherches augustiniennes 8
(1972), p. 55-143.
64
MICHAEL GORMAN
abbreviation of Gregory's Moralia in lob prepared by Paterius had enjoyed
notable success2, and Cassiodorus' commentary on the Psalms (largely a re­
working of Augustine's Enarrationes in Psalmos) was epitomized at least twice
before 900 3 . The set of brief explanationes on the Psalms published under the
name of Bede are largely Cassiodorus on the Psalms too 4 . Isidore's com­
pendium of allegorical patristic opinions on the Old Testament was epitomized
shortly after its appearance ; this epitome was used by Wigbod in his
commentary on Genesis for Charlemagne 5 . An epitome of Isidore's Etymologiae was created and used in Anglo-Saxon England6. Even relatively
unknown biblical commentaries were occasionally abbreviated. The com­
mentary on Job prepared by Philippus (saec. V) was transformed into an
abbreviated version and also used to create a set of interlinear glosses7.
WRIGHT 1981 = David F. WRIGHT, «The Manuscripts of the Tractatus in Iohannem: A
Supplementary List», Recherches augustiniennes 16 (1981), p. 59-100.
2. Clauis 1718, PL 79.683-916.
3. The unpublished epitome in Durham Β II 30 {CIA 2.152) is apparently an Anglo-Saxon
product ; Richard N. BAILEY, The Durham Cassiodorus, Jarrow Lecture 1978 (Jarrow, 1978),
rep. The Jarrow Lectures, ed. Michael LAPIDGE, 1 (London, 1995), p. 465-490. A Carolingian
epitome of the work (also unpublished) is in Salzburg a.VIII.5, a manuscript written in
Southeast Germany in the first third of the ninth century ; Bernhard BISCHOFF, Die
südostdeutschen Schreibschulen und Bibliotheken in der Karolingerzeit, 2 : Die vorwiegend
österreichischen Diözesen (Wiesbaden, 1980), p. 163-164.
4. PL 93.477-1098. Bonifatius Fischer, «Bedae de titulis psalmorum liber», Festschrift
Bernhard Bischoff zu seinem 65. Geburtstag dargebracht, ed. Johanne AUTENREITH & Franz
BRUNHÖLZL (Stuttgart, 1971), p. 98-100 : «Cassiodor ist sowieso die Hauptquelle, die bald
wörtlich exzerpiert, bald freier zusammengefaßt wird» (p. 100).
5. For this work, usually entitled 'Retractado de paradiso' and attributed to Ambrose in the
manuscripts, see my article, «Wigbod and the Lectiones on the Hexateuch Attributed to Bede in
Paris lat. 2342», Revue Bénédictine 105 (1995), p. 310-347.
6. The epitome is found in Paris lat. 1750, f. 140-152, saec. VIII-IX, North France
(Bischoff) ; Michael Lapidge, «An Isidorian Epitome from Early Anglo-Saxon England»,
Romanobarbarica 10 (1988), p. 443-483, rep. Anglo-Latin Literature, 600-899 (London,
1996), p. 183-223.
7. The commentary of Philippus was printed for the first and last time under the name of its
author by Johann Sichard in Basel in 1527 and then among the works of Bede by Jean de
Roigny in Paris in 1545, an edition which was reprinted by Johann Herwagen in Basel in 1563.
The extant eighth- and ninth-century manuscripts indicate that the commentary enjoyed a certain
degree of popularity in those centuries, especially in England and then at Tours :
CODICES ANTIQVIORES :
Cambrai, Bibliothèque municipale 470, 205 ff., 321 χ 230, saec. VIH1, England (?), AngloSaxon half-uncial. CIA 6.740.
The Hague, Rijksmuseum Meermanno-Westreenianum 10 A 1, f. 1-41, 44-199, saec. VIII
med., Tours, pre-Caroline minuscule. CIA 10.1571.
Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1839, f. 123-200v, saec. VIII ex., East France,
pre-Caroline minuscule. CIA 5.701.
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN IOANNEN
65
The epitome was an established literary genre in Antiquity which was later
appropriated by Christian authors. Summaries and epitomes of extensive historical, legal, philosophical or scientific texts were created, and often these were
published soon after the original work itself appeared. Livy's Ab urbe condita
was conceived on such a monumental scale that it could survive only in groups
of five or ten of its total 142 books - or in epitomes. It can hardly be a coincidence that one of the oldest samples of half uncial writing is a papyrus
fragment of an epitome of Livy, London Papyrus 1532, saec. III-IV (CLA
2.208). The epitome of Livy made by Florus and known to Einhard and
Freculph of Lisieux in the ninth century was excerpted by Jordanes in the
middle of the sixth century for inclusion in his De summa temporum uel origine actibusque gentis Romanorum*. Other examples of the genre are the epi—
tome of the Historiae Philippicae of the Augustan historian Pompeius Trogus
made by Iustinus 9 , and the epitome of the De uerborum significatu of M.
Verrius Flaccus made by Sextus Pompeius Festus in the second century 10 ,
CODICES SAEC. IX :
Berne, Burgerbibliothek 99, f. 1-8 & 170-171, saec. IX 2-3/3, West France (Micy ?)
(Bischoff).
Oxford, Bodleian Library, Bodl. 426 [SC 2327], f. 1-118v, saec. IX1, England (BarkerBenfield). CLA 2.234.
Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Nouv. acq. lat. 2332, f. 3, 'saec. IX in. in.', Tours
(Bischoff).
Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 1764, f. 9-10, saec. IX-X.
Troyes, Bibliothèque municipale 559, f. 109-238, saec. IX 3/4, Auxerre (?) (Bischoff).
Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Reg. lat. I l l , saec. IXmed., f. l-99v, Tours
(Wilmart).
CODICES RECENTIORES :
Florence, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, San Marco 722, 246 ff., saec. XII.
Madrid, Biblioteca nacional 437 (olim Α. 82), f. 102-175v, saec. XIV.
Paris, Bibliothèque de l'Arsenal 315, 116 ff., 'saec. XI' (catalogue), from St Victor. Used
by Jean de Roigny for his 1545 edition.
Erasmus published the abbreviated version in his 1516 edition of the works of Jerome using
St Gall 106, saec. IX ; PL 26.655-850 [619-802], STEGMÜLLER 3.3420 (= STEGMÜLLER
4.6971.1). The glosses were printed by Jean Martianay in 1693 using St Petersburg F.v.1.3, f.
1-38, saec. vili, written in uncial and Anglo-Saxon minuscule (CLA 11.1599) ; PL 23.14751536 [1407-1470], Clauis 757 (among the dubia et spuria of Pelagius), STEGMÜLLER 3.3419
(= STEGMÜLLER 4.6971.2), LAPIDGE & SHARPE 3 (under Pelagius).
The commentary by Philippus (Clauis 643, STEGMÜLLER 4.6970) was also listed by
STEGMÜLLER under Ps. Bede (2.1663-1664). The work was printed for the last time in 1688.
8. Texts and Transmission: A Survey of the Latin Classics, ed. L.D. REYNOLDS (Oxford,
1983), p. 164-166.
9. Texts and Transmission, p. 197-199.
10. Texts and Transmission, p. 162-164.
66
MICHAEL GORMAN
which was excerpted for Charlemagne by Paul the Deacon sometime after
78611.
Many of the works of Aurelius Augustinus12 were very lengthy and the unequalled authority they enjoyed made them special targets for versions on a
reduced scale. Students of Augustine in the early Middle Ages were as aware as
we are that an editor was needed to trim his rhetoric down to manageable
proportions for post-classical tastes, budgets and life-styles. Epitomes made it
possible to acquire an excellent, detailed knowledge of the content of
Augustine's long and difficult works without ever having to actually read
them. This was one of the advantages offered by the genre. Another was the
economic factor : an epitome was much cheaper to produce than a manuscript
of the complete work. By the year 800, if not perhaps well before, it was
possible to read and study most of the major works of Augustine in epitomes
or abbreviated versions, including De Genesi ad luterani, Tractatus in Euangelium Ioannis, De trinitate, Confessiones, De doctrina Christiana, and De
ciuitate dei13. Epitome is used here to refer strictly to a work which consists
almost entirely of a series of phrases or passages put together using the exact
words of the author without introducing extraneous material or personal
comments in an attempt to preserve the original scope of the work but on a
vastly reduced scale. In the case of the works of Augustine, the epitome is to be
sharply distinguished from the florilegium (or set of excerpts), of which the
best known is that of Eugippius (t e. 536)14, as well as from works which are
derivative and largely based on Augustine, but which have been re-written or
summarized, of which the earliest example is perhaps the commentary on
Psalms 100-150 of Prosper of Aquitaine (t e. 450)15. The genuine epitome is
limited to the words of the author.
11. BISCHOFF, MLAC, p. 58, n. 13.
12. That this was Augustine's name is no longer called into doubt ; see my article, «Aurelius
Augustinus : The Testimony of the Oldest Manuscripts of St. Augustine's Works», Journal of
Theological Studies 35 (1984), p. 485-490, Claude LEPELLEY, «Un aspect de la conversion
d'Augustin : La rupture avec ses ambitions sociales et politiques», Bulletin de littérature
ecclésiastique 88 (1987), p. 235, n. 26, and Gerald BONNER, «Augustinus (uita)», Augustinus
Lexikon 1/4 (Basel, 1990), col. 521.
13. Unstudied and unpublished epitomes of Augustinian works are in :
Trier 137/50, f. 1-74, saec. IX-X {De ciuitate dei).
Trier 144/1188, saec. IX 3/4, North France {Confessiones, p. 5-239; De doctrina
Christiana, p. 239-294).
14. See my articles, «The Manuscript Tradition of Eugippius' Excerpta ex operibus sancii
Augustini», Revue Bénédictine 92 (1982), p. 7-32, 229-265, and «Eugippius and the Origins
of the Manuscript Tradition of St. Augustine's De Genesi ad litteram», Revue Bénédictine 93
(1983), p. 7-30.
15. Prosper's commentary on Psalms 100-150 has survived, but this is not an epitome :
CCSL 68A, p. 3-211 ; Clauis 524. Prosper 'rewrote' Augustine's texts and did not limit
himself to redeploying Augustine's exact words; 'pauca ad litteram excerpens, plura ad sensum
in compendio redigens', as P. Callens noted (p. vii). Prosper also seems to have prepared a
florilegium of De trinitate, of which a copy is recorded in the ninth-century Lorsch catalogue,
THE OLDEST EPITOME Ο Ε THE TRACTATVS IN 10ANNEN
67
To judge from the number of items in Codices Latini Antiquiores, Au­
gustine's Enarrationes in Ρsalmos was far and away the most widely diffused
of all his works in the early Middle Ages. I count twenty-five items which are
manuscripts, fragments or excerpts of the Enarrationes. Just how significant
this number is can be appreciated by comparing it with the relevant numbers
for the other major works of Augustine : eleven entries for the Tractatus in
Euangelium Ioannis16, six for De trinitate, five for De ciuitate dei, four for De
Genesi ad litteram, three for De doctrina Christiana, and three for the
Confessiones17· It is thus not surprising that the Enarrationes was an especially
popular object for those who practised the epitomist's craft.
but this work does not seem to have survived ; 'Excerptio Prosperi ex libris de trinitate sancti
Augustini', Gustav BECKER, Catalogi bibliothecarum antiqui (Bonn, 1885), 37.165 & 313.
Prosper probably created these works in preparation for use in his Sententiae and other works ;
if so, they would have originally been his notebooks. The 84 items listed in the Lorsch
catalogue (p. 102-105) as a description of this florilegium of De trinitate are chapter headings
from the work (except for items 3 and 16). To judge from this list, Prosper included passages
from book 1, chapters 6-7, 10-11, 13 (items 1-6), book 2, chapters 2-6, 18 (items 7-12), book
3, chapters 4-5, 10 (items 13-16), book 4, chapters 1, 3, 7-9, 13-18, 20 (items 17-28), book 5,
chapters 1-2, 8-16 (items 29-39), book 6, chapters 4-10 (40-46), book 8, chapter 3 (item 47),
book 9, chapter 1 (item 48), book 12, chapters 8-11 (items 49-55), book 13, chapters 5-20
(items 56-71), book 14, chapters 12, 15-19 (items 72-77), and book 15, chapters 2, 4, 5, 14,
17, 19, 28 (items 78-84).
A different set of excerpts from De trinitate is preserved under the title Έχ libris beati
Augustini de sancta trinitate haec collecta sunt' in Boulogne 51, f. 1-53, saec. IX1, written near
Tours (Bischoff) : book 1, chapters 4, 7-13 (f. 1-11), book 2, chapters 1, 3-6 (f. ll-18v),
book 3, chapters 8-9 (f. 18v-19), book 4, chapters 20-21 (f. 19v-26v), book 5, chapters 1, 2,
4-5, 8, 10, 13-16 (f. 26v-32v), book 6, chapters 4-8, 10 (f. 32v-34v), book 7, chapters 1-3, 56 (f. 35-40), book 8, chapters 1-2 (f. 40-41v), and book 15, chapters 5-7, 14, 16-20 (f. 41v53). See E.K. RAND, A Survey of the Manuscripts of Tours, Studies in the Script of Tours 1
(Cambridge, Mass., 1929), p. 128-129, item 65, who notes that the passages in Boulogne 51
'suggest Alcuin's manual on the Holy Trinity compiled largely from St Augustine and
commended by Charlemagne at the Council of Aix-la-Chapelle in 802. The excerpts might have
been compiled at about that time, and the script of the present books suggests a date not much
later ('c. 800', Dom Wilmart). The ruling forces us to a later date, it would seem, not much
earlier than 820.'
Prosper could have been the author of the most widely-used set of chapter headings for De
trinitate, as Eligius Dekkers has suggested, «Quelques notes sur des florilèges augustiniens
anciens et médiévaux», Collectanea augustiniana : Mélanges T. J. Van Bavel, éd. B. Bruning,
Augustiniana 40-41 (Leuven, 1990), p. 28-29.
16. Milan F 60 sup., f. 50 & 52-54 (CLA 3.339) and Paris lat. 10399, f. 42-43 (CLA
5.595) are excluded from this count since they contain an epitome of the work and not the work
itself.
17. For these statistics, see CLA and my article, «The Manuscript Traditions of St.
Augustine's Major Works», Atti del Congresso internazionale su S. Agostino nel XVI
Centenario della Conversione, Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum 24, ed. Vittorino GROSSI, 1
(Rome, 1987), p. 381-412.
68
MICHAEL GORMAN
The oldest epitome of an Augustinian work is perhaps the epitome of the
Enarrationes, which must have been prepared in the sixth century, if not
before, preserved in Lyons 426 + Paris Nouv. acq. lat. 1629, f. 7-14. This
book was dated 'saec. VI-VII' by Lowe (CLA 6.773a)18.
Another epitomized version of the Enarrationes in Psalmos is found in a
well-known group of manuscripts, Cologne 63, Cologne 65 and Cologne 67,
which contain the text divided into three volumes. The nuns who copied these
books for archbishop Hildebald of Cologne about the year 800, evidently at
Chelles 19 , perhaps ran out of patience when they reached Augustine's many
explanations on Psalm 118, because from this point on in Cologne 67, the
female scribes abbreviated the text 20 . The epitome might have been
deliberately put together for their own use by the nuns who wrote the
manuscripts, and they might have hoped that Hildebald would not notice how
much of the authentic text was missing. It is also possible, however, that the
abbreviated version they were copying was put together earlier, perhaps
several centuries before. The same epitomized version of the Enarrationes is
found in Berlin Phillipps 165721, which was written by the same group of nuns
at the same time and was originally the third volume of another set of three
whose first two volumes are apparently lost ; in the thirteenth century, the
manuscript was collated against a copy of the Enarrationes and the passages
missing from f. 111 onwards were added in the margins and on folios added to
the book, a remarkable demonstration of the respect accorded Augustine's
18. The nature of this epitome can be appreciated from the brief texts presented in the plate in
CLA (Lyons 426, f. 49) which are short phrases extracted from Augustine's work on Psalm
61 : -lis in omnibus uoluntas (CCSL 39.784,19), Conuertit - in deo (784,1 bis-3 bis), Vos qui
- iniquitatem (784,4 bis-5 bis), Et in rapinam non concupiscatis (785,14-15), -ferendo -fallitis
(785,51-52), Monui - opera eius (786,56-4). Adolf Primmer brought the epitome in this
manuscript to my attention.
19. Bischoff suggested but did not attempt to prove that the Cologne manuscripts were
written at Chelles in his 1957 article, «Die Kölner Nonnenhandschriften und das Skriptorium
von Chelles», Mittelalterliche Studien 1 (Stuttgart, 1966), p. 26, where he notes : Of all the
old convents once in Northeast France, whether they were famous, obscure, or have
disappeared without trace, I suggest we view the abbey of Chelles, the old Kala, as the home of
this script.' See also Ursula WINTER, «Lateinische Literatur der X. Jahrhunderts in
mittelalterlichen Bibliotheken», Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 24-25 (1989-1990), p. 555-556.
Bischoff's intuition tends to be confirmed by the relic labels found recently at Chelles (ChLA
18.669) ; see the comments of David GANZ, «Charters Earlier than 800 from French
Collections», Speculum 65 (1990), p. 928-929.
20. The epitome begins on f. 112, where four passages are dropped from Augustine's
introduction {CCSL 40.1664,1-1665,29) on the first sixteen lines : 1664,7 Et cum - 11 non
cessi ; 1664,13 ita ut - 1665,14 non possem ; 1665,21 Sic enim - 23 exposui ; 1665,25 Hoc
enim -27 cantilena. The corresponding passage is found in Berlin Phillipps 1657, f. 111. See
plate 1. For information about these texts and manuscripts I am grateful to Franco Gori who
kindly sent me photographs of them.
21. The manuscript was perhaps once at St Vincent in Metz ; see Valentin ROSE,
Verzeichnis der lateinischen Handschriften der königlichen Bibliothek zu Berlin 1 (Berlin,
1893), p. 35.
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN lOANNEN
69
words. See plate 1. Walahfrid Strabo put together another epitome of the
Enarrañones22. Other attempts to create a reduced version of the Enarrationes
were made in the ninth century23.
I. - THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE «TRACTATVS IN EVANGELIVM IOANNIS»
A decade ago I published in this journal two epitomes of Augustine's De
Genesi ad litteram which date from before the year 800, one of which was
used when Wigbod prepared his commentary on Genesis for Charlemagne in
the 790s 24 . Here is presented what is apparently the oldest epitome of Augustine's Tractatus in Euangelium Ioannis25, a heretofore unpublished
'anonymous commentary on the Gospel of John, in reality a condensation and
reworking of the Tractatus in Euangelium Ioannis'26, as it was described
nearly twenty years ago by John Contreni, which is found in at least three
ninth-century manuscripts27. The manuscripts themselves offer no clue about
22. The epitome of the Enarrationes prepared by Walahfrid Strabo {PL 114.752-794) is
found in several manuscripts ; STEGMÜLLER 5.8324. See Alf ÖNNERFORS, «Über Walahfrid
Strabos Psalter-Kommentar», Literatur und Sprache im europäischen Mittelalter, ed. Alf
ÖNNERFORS, Johannes RATHOFER & Fritz WAGNER (Darmstadt, 1973), p. 75-121.
23. Such as the set of excerpts of the work which is found in two ninth-century manuscripts,
Munich Clm 14176 and Karlsruhe Aug. CLII, which were brought to my attention by Franco
Gori.
24. See my articles, «An Unedited Fragment of an Irish Epitome of St. Augustine's De
Genesi ad litteram», Revue des Etudes Augustiniennes 28 (1982), p. 76-85, «A Carolingian
Epitome of St. Augustine's De Genesi ad litteram», Revue des Études Augustiniennes 29
(1983), p. 137-144, and my retractatio in which I explain why I no longer consider the epitome
published in 1982 to be Irish, «Augustine Manuscripts from the Library of Louis the Pious :
Berlin Phillipps 1651 and Munich Clm 3824», Scriptorium 50 (1996), p. 98, n. 1. For an
example of how telling fragments of exegetical treatises occasionally may be, see E.A. LOWE'S
1960 article, «An Unedited Fragment of Irish Exegesis in Visigothic Script», Ρalaeographical
Papers, 1907-1965, ed. Ludwig BlELER (Oxford, 1972), 2, p. 459-465.
25. CCSL 36 ; PL 35.1379-1976 ; Clauis 278, the notes and introduction of M.F. BERROUARD, Bibliothèque augustinienne 1Ì-1A (Paris, 1988-1993), and the series of
articles by George LAWLESS, «Augustine's Use of Rhetoric in His Interpretation of John 21:123», Augustinian Studies 23 (1992), p. 53-67, «The Man Born Blind: Augustine's Tractate 44
on John 9», Augustinian Studies 27 (1996), p. 59-77, and «Listening to Augustine: Tractate 44
on John 9», Augustinian Studies 28 (1997), p. 51-66. The extant manuscripts are listed and
discussed in WRIGHT 1972 and WRIGHT 1981, but it remains to be seen whether a stemma can
be drawn for such a complicated transmission, for if the total number of manuscripts is high,
nearly all are incomplete; Rome Vallicelliana A. 14, written in South Italy in the seventh century
(CLA 4.429) would seem to be the only complete (1-17, 20-124) extant copy written before the
year 800.
26. John CONTRENI, The Cathedral School ofLaonfrom 850 to 930: Its Manuscripts and
Masters, Münchener Beiträge zur Mediävistik und Renaissance-Forschung 29 (Munich, 1978),
p. 75.
27. Additional manuscripts of this epitome probably await to be discovered.
70
MICHAEL GORMAN
the origin of the epitome, but note that both Laon 80 (L) and Vatican Pal. lat.
176 (P) were written at St Amand :
Laon 80, 80 ff., saec. IX med., St Amand (L)2». An A4-size book : 265 χ
215 <190 χ 160>, written in 29 long lines. 'Incipit de cena dominica' on f. 47ν
(marking the start of Tractatus 55 ; John 13.1) ; see plate 4. The ninth line on
f. 69v was left blank to write the rubric which is found in Vatican lat. 637 (V)
on f. 156 : 'Nunc de domini passione sic exorsus est euangelista' (marking the
start of Tractatus 112 ; John 18.1)29. Lemmata marked in the outer margins
with an s-like flourish throughout ; some lemmata set off with an initial in
red. Quires are regularly quaternions except for the second (a ternion) ; a
single leaf (f. 62) was entered into the eighth (f. 55-63). Quires are numbered
in two styles, always in the center at the bottom of the last folio. The first two
quires are marked with a Q followed by a number (such as 'Q. Γ on f. 8v),
whereas the remaining eight quires are marked with a Γ-like sign followed by
a number (such as 'Γ.ΙΙΓ on f. 22v). The change in numbering quires after the
second quire (f. 14v, a ternion) may indicate an interruption or change of
scribes. It is difficult to say whether the manuscript was all written by one
hand. The last leaf which follows the tenth quire (marked T.X' and also 'K' on
f. 79v) is marked T.XF and also 4L' on f. 80. Carefully corrected against the
exemplar by the original scribe30.
Whereas neither Vatican Pal. lat. 176 (P) or Vatican lat. 637 (V) shows any
sign of having been studied, there is much evidence that Laon 80 (L) was used
by various readers. Passages are numbered throughout in the margins from 1232, although the meaning of this numbering scheme is not clear. Various
symbols are used in the margins, and some were perhaps entered by the scribe
(from the exemplar) and others by later readers, but it is not obvious what the
different symbols might mean. Asterisks in the manner of Adelelm (according
to Contreni) are entered in the margins31. The cross (which may indicate the
28. CONTRENI, p. 37 ('an anonymous commentary on John from the mid-ninth century. It
bears the marks and script of Martin Hiberniensis and perhaps of Adelelm'), p. 38, n. 30
(donated to the cathedral by Martin), p. 42 (from St Amand), p. 96 (on the marginal notes on
f. 6, 12v, 35ν made by Martin), p. 157 (owned by Martin, asterisks in the manner of
Adelelm), and p. 186 (unidentified works, item 377). Described by WRIGHT 1981, p. 80, as 'a
(Carolingian?) commentary on John's Gospel which is in reality a condensation and reworking
of Augustine's Tractatus, according to Contreni.' I am grateful to John Contreni for kindly
lending me his microfilm of this manuscript and for sending me his unpublished notes on it.
Bischoff s note on this manuscript (of which Monika Köstlin kindly supplied a copy) is dated
26 November 1962.
29. WRIGHT 1972, p. 73, has pointed out how the second portion of the Tractatus (55-124)
is listed in medieval library catalogues under the titles, 'De cena domini', and 'De domini
passione'.
30. As can be seen from words added on f. lv, f. 4, 7v, 35v, 38v, 39, 64v, 65v, 66v, 68,
70v.
31. On f. 4, 5, 5v, 7v, 8, 9, 9v, lOv, 19, 21, 21v, 26v, 27, 29, 34v, 38v, 39, 40, 40v, 41,
43v, 47v, 50, 56v, 59, 59v, 63, 70, 70v, 73, 73v, 74, 75v, 77v.
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN IOANNEN
71
beginning of a new tractatus, for example on f. 43) is found in the margin32.
The chrismon is occasionally found in the margin too33. The 'Nota' sign occurs
several times in the margin34. These symbols are not found in either Vatican
Pal. lat. 176 (P) or Vatican lat. 637 (V). Perhaps the same reader (Martin of
Laon or another scholar at Laon ?) entered the section numbers (1-232), the
crosses, the chrismons and the asterisks while collating the epitome against a
manuscript of the Tractatus ? Otherwise, how could the beginning of a new
tractatus have been noted? Examples of these symbols are given in plate 4
(f. 47v).
According to Contreni, Martin of Laon entered marginal notes such as 'De
Isaac et Ismahel' on f. 8, 'De quadragintario numero' on f. 14, 'Quid est inter
patrem et filium' on f. 17v, 'De unitale' on f. 33, 'De Christo et Abraham' on
f. 35v and again on f. 36v. The same hand entered 'De prima hydria, De
secunda, De tertia, De quarta, De quinto, De sexta' on f. 6 (see plate 2). Martin
evidently was interested in how Christ was prefigured in the Old Testament.
Another reader seems to have collated a portion of the epitome (f. 10v-13)
against a manuscript containing the Tractatus and added several notes, espe­
cially on f. 12v (see plate 3) 35 , although it is not immediately clear why these
passages were of such great interest.
For decades this manuscript has stood on the shelf in the library of Laon
next to Laon 81, the only manuscript known to preserve the commentary on
the Gospel of John written by John Scottus Eriugena. The name 'Fridulfo'
appears in a faded note at the top of f. 80v.
Vatican Pal. lat. 176, f. 87-161, written at St Amand in the middle of the
ninth century and later in the library at Lorsch (Ρ) 36 . 230 χ 175 <190 χ 130>
'Incipit de cena dominica' on f. 129v and a line left blank to write 'Nunc de
domini passione sic exorsus est euangelista' on f. 150v. Complete, following
Jerome on Matthew (f. 2-86). An unidentified text on f. 161v-162v. A few
variant readings entered in the margins (f. 87v, 88, 90v, 91, etc.). Chapter
numbers for the Gospel of John entered by a later hand (saec. XVI ?). Lemmata
set off by a simple initial in red, as in Laon 80 (L).
Vatican lat. 637 (olim 163), f. 126-160v, 'copied in the first half of the ninth
century, probably at St Denis', from St-Vivant de Vergy in Burgundy (V)37. A
large book, with the text written in two columns on 53 lines on folios now
32. On f. 26, 36, 37v, 38, 38v, 40v, 41, 43, 43v, 54v, 55v, 57, 58, 65.
33. On 5v, 6v, 7v, lOv, 22v, 29, 32v, 38, 45, 73v.
34. On f. 7, 8, llv, 25, 28v, 40v, 43v, 47v.
35. The texts which have been entered in the outer margin are all taken from the Tractatus:
CCSL 36.160,11-15, 19-20, 20-22, 18 bis-19; 161,2 ter, 6 ter-7, 7 ter-8, 162, 8-9, 11-12.
36. Bernhard BISCHOFF, Lorsch im Spiegel seiner Handschriften (Munich, 1974), p. 106 ;
Die Abtei Lorsch im Spiegel ihrer Handschriften (Lorsch, 1989), p. 118 ('saec. IX med., St
Amand') and p. 60. WRIGHT 1972, p. 138, where the contents are given as: 'extracts (perhaps
similar to Vat. lat. 637, f. 126-160v)\ WRIGHT 1981, p. 93 ('extracts').
37. BISCHOFF, MLAC, p. 109, n. 83. WRIGHT 1972, p. 76 ('continuous extracts'), p. 137.
72
MICHAEL GORMAN
measuring 400 χ 280 <340 χ 280>. Headings in capitals, 'INCIPIT DE CENA
DOMINI' on f. 146v and 'NVNC DE DOMINI PASSIONE SIC EXORSVS EST
EVANGELISTA' on f. 156. Incomplete at the very end (missing the text found in
Vatican Pal. lat. 176, f. 159v, line 14 onwards), following Bede on Mark (f. 152v) and Ambrose on Luke (f. 53-124v). An unidentified text on f. 125-125v.
Some lemmata marked in the margins with an s-like flourish38. Lectiones
numbered by a later reader (saec. XIII ?) on f. 134 and f. 151 v. Notes by a
later hand (saec. XI ?) at the bottom of f. 134 and f. 151. Listed in the
unpublished eleventh-century catalogue (Gottlieb 413) of the books of StVivant de Vergy, Vatican lat. 1981, f. 1, line 7 : 'Ambrosius super Lucam.' 39 .
The epitome is older than one would judge from the date of these three
witnesses, since we happen to have a fragment and some excerpts which were
copied in the eighth century :
A fragment of this epitome is found in Paris lat. 10399, f. 42-43 (E), which
measures 342 χ 248 <320 χ 225> in two columns of 36 lines 40 . The AngloSaxon minuscule of the fragment dates from the eighth century, and the largeformat book to which the two folios originally belonged, written in two
columns, was probably prepared at Echternach41. By the twelfth century the
folios were serving as fly leaves for an Echternach manuscript ; the twelfthcentury ex-libris, 'Codex sancti Willibrordi Epternacensis ecclesie patroni',
written vertically between columns, can still be read on f. 42 ; this manuscript
was evidently a Priscian, since beneath the fifteenth-century pressmark, 'M6',
we find the note : 'Continet Pristianum grammaticum.' Approximately eight
38. The source marks in the commentary of Bede on Mark in this manuscript were noticed
and discussed by E. J. SUTCLIFFE, «Quotations in the Venerable Bede's Commentary on St
Mark», Biblica 1 (1926), p. 428-439. On the significance of source marks, see my article, «The
Commentary on Genesis of Claudius of Turin and Biblical Studies under Louis the Pious»,
Speculum 72 (1997), p. 312, n. 121.
39. Vatican Vat. 637 is part of the oldest collection in the Vatican and entered with the books
of the erudite French cardinal Jean Jouffroy (tl473). Giovanni MERCATI, «Una lettera di
Vespasiano da Bisticci a Jean Jouffroi vescovo di Arras e la biblioteca romana del Jouffroi»,
Opere minori 6, Studi e Testi 296 (Vatican City, 1984), p. 197-198, and Anna LANCOMELLI,
«La biblioteca romana di Jean Jouffroy», Scritture, biblioteche e stampa a Roma nel
Quattrocento: Aspetti e problemi (Vatican City, 1980), p. 280, 283, 290.
40. On the fragments on f. 35-36 in this manuscript {CIA 5.585), see Dáibhí Ó CRÓINÍN,
«Early Echternach Manuscript Fragments with Old Irish Glosses», Willibrord, Apostel der
Niederlande, Gründer der Abtei Echternach : Gedenkgabe zum 1250. Todestag des
angelsächsischen Missionars, ed. Georges KIESEL & Jean SCHROEDER (Luxembourg, 1989),
p. 135-143.
41. CLA 5.595. Wright 1972, p. 130. On Echternach and its scriptorium, see Nancy
NETZER, Cultural Interplay in the Eighth Century: The Trier Gospels and the making of a
scriptorium at Echternach, Cambridge Studies in Palaeography and Codicology 3 (Cambridge,
1995), especially p. 4-11, and the review of Dáibhí Ó CRÓINÍN, Penna 9 (1995), p. 421-424.
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN 10ANN EN
73
pages of the text of the Tractatus as found in the CCSL edition were epito­
mized in one folio42.
Excerpts from this epitome on various passages from John 1.1-11.9 are
found, along with interpolated comments, on four folios in Milan F 60 sup.,
f. 50, 52-54 (B). These folios measure c. 210 χ c. 165 <180-190 χ 140> and
are written in 19 or 27 long lines. They come from a smallish book which was
penned at the end of the eighth century in Irish minuscule 'by an Irish scribe
under Continental influence, presumably at Bobbio' 43 .
The epitome thus dates from the eighth century if not before, perhaps even
well before (saec. VI ? saec. VII ?). From beginning to end, the compiler has
taken words and phrases from Augustine's work and rearranged them into a
commentary, following closely the lemmata of the Gospel of John. No other
source seems to have been used and personal comments are few. It thus seems
impossible to discover elements which would allow us to establish the date and
place of origin of the epitome. Four selections from this epitome are given in
the Appendix : on John 1.1-18 {Tractatus 1-3), on John 8.37-47 {Tractatus
42), on John 11.1-54 {Tractatus 49), and on John 21.19-25 {Tractatus 124).
The words not taken directly from Augustine's Tractatus have been set in bold.
At the beginning of the work (Appendix, lines 3-18), the compiler seems to
have felt free to add some words and ideas of his own, but this practice was
abandoned as he progressed through Augustine's work. In the later selections,
the epitomist follows closely Augustine's work and rarely transposes passages,
whereas at the beginning Augustine's words and phrases are freely rearranged
in order to make them bear directly on the words of the Gospel. The work was
useful not only for beginners but also for advanced students and scholars
planning a commentary on the Gospel of John and in need of a guide to Au­
gustine's long work. The epitomist seems to have given relatively equal
attention to all sections of Augustine's work (including Tractatus 20-22, but
not Tractatus 19). The result is a work of manageable proportions which is
42. The text on f. 42v and 42 (Appendix, lines 147-212) covers CCSL 36.365,12-373,12
bis [= Tractatus 42 on John 8.37-48], while that on f. 43 and 43v (Appendix, lines 215-294)
covers CCSL 36.419,18-428,13 bis [= Tractatus 49 on John 11.1-33]. The abbreviation of the
text on the 44 intervening pages (= CCSL 36.374-420) would have taken up about six folios.
Since the edition occupies 688 pages, the complete Echternach manuscript would have required
about 86 folios or about eleven quaternions. The Paris fragments might have constituted the
outer bifolium of a quire (perhaps the seventh), which, after having been cut in half, were later
pressed into service as fly leaves when the need for such abbreuiationes had long since
vanished.
43. CLA 3.339. The contents of CIA item 336 are given as 'Excerpta ex patribus' in Irish
minuscule, f. 1-46, 58-77. Text in PLS 4.1999-2004 ; reprinted from Anselme HOSTE, In
principio erat uerbum (Steenbrugge, 1961), who considered the text to be 'Irish'. See KELLY
96. Cited by BISCHOFF, «Wendepunkte», p. 269, n. 141 ; Eng. trans., p. 160, n. 141.
WRIGHT 1972, p. 122, 1981, p. 71, where the use of Tractatus 20 is noted. The list of heresies
{PLS 4.2001, lines 2-18, reproduced in CLA) which must have been written at Bobbio and
inserted among the excerpts provides interesting evidence of the preocupations there in the
eighth century.
74
MICHAEL GORMAN
about 20% the length of the original work, making either a handy volume, as
in the case of Laon 80 (80 folios) or allowing the work to be included in
compendia including other exegetical treatises, such as Vatican Pal. lat. 176
(P), where it was added to Jerome on Matthew, or Vatican lat. 637 (V), where
it accompanies Bede on Mark and Ambrose on Luke44.
II. - COMMENTARIES ON JOHN IN THE EARLY MIDDLE AGES
The easiest way to put together a commentary on the Gospel of John in the
early Middle Ages was to appropriate phrases and ideas from Augustine's
Tractatus in Euangelium loannis, and nearly all commentaries on John
compiled in this period tend to be indistinguishable from reworkings of
Augustine's treatise, a masterpiece which dominated studies on the fourth
Gospel for centuries. In addition to epitomes of Augustine's Tractatus, material
on John in the early Middle Ages was presented in quaestiones et responsiones,
notebooks of teachers of Scripture, personalized versions of Alcuin's commentary, and sets of glosses and brief comments.
A successful and widely circulated text on John in the pre-Carolingian
period which was not wholely dependent on the Tractatus was the commentary
which appears in the set of Gospel commentaries which are usually attributed
to Jerome (but also to Gregory) in the manuscripts45. This was apparently the
44. Other abbreviated versions of the Tractatus are found in:
Munich Clm 14286, saec. VIII-IX (CLA 9.1293 with plate of f. 14v, Tr. 34). WRIGHT 1972,
p. 59 (abbrev. 30-124), p. 124 ('probably abbreviation'), WRIGHT 1981, p. 85 ('probably in
an abridged text'). Mentioned in the 1500-1501 St Emmeram catalogue.
St Gall 241, p. 65-172. WRIGHT, p. 59 (abbrev., 1-18, 20), p. 76 ('1-19'), p. 134 ('saec.
IX 1 ').
45. PL 30.577-590 [596-608] = PL 114.903-916 (under the name of Walahfrid Strabo).
BISCHOFF, «Wendepunkte», item 11, argued these commentaries were of Irish origin and
distinguished three recensions, although he presented no convincing proof for his assertions,
only the standard appeals to 'Irish symptoms' and 'Irish sources'. See Bruno GRIESSER,
«Beiträge zur Textgeschichte der Expositio IV euangeliorum des Ps.-Hieronymus», Zeitschrift
für katholische Theologie 54 (1930), p. 40-87, and «Die Handschriftliche Überlieferung der
Expositio IV euangeliorum des Ps.-Hieronymus», Revue Bénédictine 49 (1937), p. 279-321.
Griesser (p. 309) suggested the commentary might be from Ireland or North Italy, judging from
the diffusion of the manuscripts. Kelly (56A, p. 397) describes the work as 'almost pedestrian
in character. The comments are very brief, often just a word or two, and they are rarely
original, usually having been taken from the Latin Fathers.'
Three 'recensions' of these commentaries were identified by Bischoff :
Recensio I. PL 30.531-590 [549-608] (attributed in the manuscripts to Jerome), PL
114.861-916 (printed under the name of Walahfrid Strabo). CPL 631. STEGMÜLLER 34243427. The text in PL 30 is lemmatized better.
Recensio II. Ps. Gregory: unpublished (attributed in the manuscripts to Gregory).
STEGMÜLLER 3428-3431. This recension is being edited by Anne Kavanagh of Trinity
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN WANNEN
75
first attempt to create a commentary on all four Gospels ; the next attempt was
Wigbod's. The so-called Ps. Jerome commentary on John (as it is usually
referred to) makes no claim to commenting on the entire Gospel and appears
to be an original composition in which the author gives evidence of having
reflected on some (but not all) of the more important passages. The comments
on each lemma are very brief, practically glosses, but they do not all seem to
have been copied verbatim from a patristic source. The Ps. Jerome commentary would have been useful to those who needed to conduct a series of
lectures on the Gospel in church or in the classroom. The commentary could
have been used to guide the instructor through the exegesis of many significant
passages and it also supplied ample opportunity to add personal comments.
Another brief commentary on John from about the same time (saec. VIII2 ?)
appears in the compilation which Bischoff considered to be of Irish origin and
which he termed 'Das irische Bibelwerk'46. Joseph Kelly has described this
commentary in the following terms : The commentary for the fourth gospel
begins like the Lucan one : INCIPIVNT PAVCA DE EXPLANATIONE SANCTI
AVGVSTINI IN IOHANNEM, referring to Augustine's Tractatus in Euangelium
lohannis, a work well-known to the Irish exegetes'47.
III. - ALCUIN ON JOHN
The only new commentary on John which seems to have achieved a measure
of success between the end of Antiquity and the twelfth century was Alcuin's.
Abbreviated and simplified works satisfied a deeply felt need during the reign
of Charlemagne, and Alcuin's effort was the result of such a request. In a note
to Alcuin sent about the year 800, Gisla and Rodtruda, Charlemagne's sister
and daughter, probably speak for many when they complain about what they
considered the excessively rhetorical style of Augustine's Tractatus in
Euangelium Ioannis. Instead, Gisla, the abbess of the convent at Chelles located
half way between Paris and Meaux, and Rodtruda ask for a simpler kind of
commentary on the Gospel of John :
College, Dublin. See my article, «The Carolingian Exegetical Compendium in Albi 39 and Paris
lat. 2175 : With notes on Paris lat. 614A and Paris lat. 10612», Scriptorium 51 (1997),
forthcoming.
Recensio III. Unpublished. STEGMÜLLER 3432-3435.
For the bibliography, see LAPIDGE & SHARPE 341, p. 97, where the work is accepted as
Irish and the text in PL 114.861-916 is identified as Recension II by mistake.
46. BISCHOFF, «Wendepunkte», p. 231-236 ; Eng. trans., p. 97-102.
47. The (unpublished) commentary is found in Paris lat. 11561, f. 170v-183v. Joseph
F. KELLY, «Das Bibelwerk: Organization and Quellenanalyse of the New Testament section»,
Irland und die Christenheit: Bibelstudien und Mission, ed. Próinséas NÍ CHATHAIN & Michael
RICHTER (Stuttgart, 1987), p. 117.
76
MICHAEL GORMAN
«We have the commentaries on the same Gospel in the language of the homilies of
the most famous doctor Augustine, but these are difficult to understand in certain
places and are decorated with greater rhetorical expression than our limited
intellectual capacity can comprehend48».
In response to their request, Alcuin sent them his own commentary on John
in which Augustine's Tractatus in Euangelium Ioannis is the chief source and
influence 49 . We have an indication that abbreviated versions of Augustine's
Tractatus in Euangelium Ioannis were found useful in this period. In a letter
directed to Ricbod, abbot of Lorsch and archbishop of Trier, in 795, Alcuin
refers to a 'libellus excerptionis' on the Gospel of John :
48. 'Habemus siquidem clarissimi doctoris Augustini homeliatico sermone explanationes in
eundem euangelistam, sed quibusdam in locis multo obscuriores maiorique circumlocutione
decoratas, quam nostrae paruitatis ingeniólo intrare ualeat.' Alcuin, Ep. 196, MGH Ep. 4,
p. 324. Gisla and this letter is discussed in Bernhard Bischoff's 1957 study, «Die Kölner
Nonnenhandschriften», Mittelalterliche Studien 1 (Stuttgart, 1966), p. 27.
49. Alcuin's commentary on John was published for the first time by Johann Herwagen
(fi 558) in Strasbourg in 1527 just before he moved to Basel (BnF call number A.7825). It
would be interesting to know whether the manuscript used is still extant. André Duchesne
(1584-1640) included the commentary on John in his edition of Alcuin's works which was
published in Paris in 1617 (BnF call number C.683), using a manuscript from the library of
Jacques-Auguste de Thou, today Paris lat. 2385, saec. XI (BN Cat gén. 2, p. 437-438).
Another edition of Alcuin's commentary prepared by Frobenius Forster was published in
Regensburg in 1777, using Munich Clm 14391 (which was still in the library of St Emmeram at
the time) and Vatican Reg. lat. 109, saec. XIII ; this edition was reprinted by Migne (PL
100.733-1008). The work is divided into 46 chapters distributed in seven books : books 1-5
on John 1-12 and books 6-7 on John 13-21. The study of the manuscript tradition of the work
should prove to be interesting (it is hard to say whether the PL text accurately represents
Alcuin's work), since it seems that books 6-7 were sent to Gisla (see the letters in PL 100.737744 & 923 = Epistolae 214, 196, 213, 195, MGH Ep. 4, p. 357-358, 323-325, 354-357, 322323) in advance of books 1-5. Among the ninth-century manuscripts (dates and origins as
supplied by Bischoff are reported in CANTELLI, p. 28), five contain all seven books of Alcuin's
commentary:
Munich Clm 14391, saec. IX1
Cologne 108, saec. IX1, lower Rhein area
Laon 84, saec. IX 3/4, near Reims
St Gall 275, saec. IX1, St Gall
Valenciennes 81, saec. IX 3/4, near Reims
while three contain only books 1-5,
Cologne 107, c. A.D. 800-801 (?), Tours
Cologne 109, saec. IX 3/4, West Germany
Paris lat. 13208, saec. IX 3/4, near Lyons
and one only books 6-7,
Basel O.II.28, saec. IX, North or Northeast France.
A useful overview of the sources employed by Alcuin, primarily Augustine's Tractatus in
Euangelium Ioannis of course but also Bede's homilies, and an occasional use of Hilary's De
trinitate, Ambrose's De fide, Jerome's letters, Gregory's homilies and other works is found in
CANTELLI, p. 55-59.
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN IOANNEN
77
«If Samuel has had the volume of excerpts on the Gospel on John copied out, I ask
you to send it to us50».
Known in court circles as 'Samuel', Beornrad, abbot of Echternach from
775 and archbishop of Sens from about 785, was one of the first Anglo-Saxons
in Charlemagne's entourage51. This 'libellus excerptionis' was perhaps the
personal notebook which Alcuin compiled while reading Augustine's Tractatus
in Euangelium loannis and Bede's homilies and which served him as the basis
for his own commentary52. The phrase, libellus excerptionis, which Alcuin
used in his letter to Ricbod, probably refers to an epitome or set of excerpts he
devised himself, since he does not seem to have used the epitome in Laon 80
presented here53.
IV. - REWORKINGS OF ALCUIN
The number of extant ninth-century manuscripts of Alcuin on John (at least
ten) reflects only partially the success his commentary enjoyed in that century,
for it also served as the basis for at least three 'new' commentaries put together
in the ninth century which are essentially reworked versions of Alcuin with
supplementary material added54.
1. A commentary on John was included in Herwagen's 1563 edition of
Bede's works 55 . The work was attributed to Bede when it was printed for the
first time in Paris in 1539 by Michel Vascosan, one of the several heirs of
Iosse Bade (Iodocus Badius Ascensius), under the title, 'Venerabilis Bedae
presbyteri, Theologi doctissimi, in sanctum Iesu Christi secundum Iohannem
euangelium expositio luculentissima, nunc primum ex Christianissimi
50. 'Rogo si Samuel libellum excerptionis in loannis euangelium habeat perscriptum, ut
dirigat nobis.' Ep. 49, MGH Ep. 4, p. 93.
51. Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter: Vorzeit und Karolinger, ed. Wilhelm
LEVISON & Heinz LÖWE, 2 (Weimar, 1953), p. 200. Franz BRUNHÖLZL, Histoire de la
littérature latine du Moyen Age 1/2 (Turnhout, 1991), p. 40, 44 & 70.
52. As Cantelli has suggested, p. 50.
53. Compare the texts printed in the Appendix to PL 100.870A-874B and 896-991.
54. A detailed examination along the lines of the valuable and interesting study Silvia Cantelli
has provided for the commentary in St Gall 258 is required for each of these items.
55. PL 92.633-938, STEGMÜLLER 1680. The first part of this commentary {PL 92.633-800,
on John 1-12) consists of the first five books of Alcuin's commentary on John {PL 100.7331008), but the last half {PL 92.800-938 ; on John 13-21) is not based on books 6-7 of Alcuin
{PL 100.923-1008). Excerpts from Alcuin's letter were added to form a new preface : 'Scire
debetis - Christi mysteria conspexit.' {PL 92.635-638B = PL 100.740D-741D, 741D-742C,
742D-743B) This preface in turn seems to have served someone who composed the brief
preface for Augustine's Tractatus in Euangelium loannis which was used in the Glossa
ordinaria {PL 114.355-356) and printed for the first time by Erasmus (PL 35.1377-1380 ;
CCSL 36, p. xiv).
78
MICHAEL GORMAN
Francorum Regis Valesii Bibliotheca in lucem edita ...' 5 6 . In the dedication to
Jean Du Tillet 57 , Vascosan mentions that the manuscript was found in the
library of François I at Blois by Jean de Gagny (|1549), professor of theology
at the Collège de Navarre beginning in 1529, and chaplain and preacher of
François I and his close advisor who once proposed to the king that all
manuscripts in France be transferred to a new library in Paris. De Gagny was
the author of commentaries on the New Testament and prepared editions of
Avitus (from a manuscript he found at St-Benigne, Dijon), Claudius Marius
Victor (from a manuscript he found at Île-Barbe, Lyons), Eusebius, Primasius
and many other works 58 . It was the policy of François I to encourage the
publication of editions of works based on manuscripts in his library ; subsidies
were offered to printers, and perhaps De Gagny and Vascosan took advantage
of these favourable circumstances to bring out their 'Bede on John' 59 .
The manuscript used by De Gagny and Vascosan has evidently disappeared 60 , but another copy of the text ended up in the collection of Alexandre
Petau (11672) which was sold to Christina, queen of Sweden, in 1650. This
book today is Vatican Reg. lat. 307, saec. IX 2/4, Lyons (Bischoff), and
contains Bede on Luke (f. 7-96) followed by the commentary on John (f. 96v-
56. Vascosan's edition {Index Aureliensis 115.636) was reprinted by Jean de Roigny in
1545, vol. 2, f. 121-199v, and then in the editio princeps of Bede's opera omnia published by
Herwagen in Basel in 1563, vol. 5, col. 519-860 ; on the 1545 edition of Bede, see my article,
«The Commentary on the Pentateuch Attributed to Bede in PL 91.189-394», Revue Bénédictine
106 (1996), p. 62, n. 3.
57. Since this book is not in every library (BnF call number C.847), the text of the
dedication is given : 'Iohanni Tilio probo ac literato uiro Michael Vascosanus s.d. Cum mihi
cottidie obuersarentur ante oculos egregii illi labores quos in augenda re nostra latina suscipis,
cumque ego ipse et tuam diligentiam expertus essem saepius et admirarer etiam subtilitatem,
ingenium atque facilitatem, uolebam sane atque adeo uehementissime optabam, ut te ipsum si
minus pari at certe grato aliquo muñere compensarem. Itaque cum nuper D. Iohan. Gagneius uir
cum in unguis et disciplinis, turn in literarum diuinarum scientia excellens, Regia e bibliotheca
nobis Venerabilem Bedam in Iohannis euangelium deprompsisset, ut eum si uellem, ederem :
feci equidem, et feci non inuitus, ut eum tibi dicarem.'
58. On De Gagny, see Leopold DELISLE, Le Cabinet des manuscrits de la bibliothèque
imperiale 1 (Paris, 1885), p. 162-163, and «Gaigny, Jean de», Dictionnaire de biographie
française 15 (Paris, 1982), col. 63-64.
59. As Delisle notes (1, p. 178-179), 'Les savants n'obtenaient pas seulement communication des volumes qui la composaient: le roi les encourageait à publier les textes nouveaux
qu'ils y découvraient, et donnait des subventions aux imprimeurs dont les presses multipliaient
à l'infini les exemplaires des œuvres de l'antiquité.'
60. Jonas of Orléans, writing on behalf of his fellow bishops assembled at the council of
Aachen in 836, refers to Bede's expositio on the gospel of John ; MGH Leges 3 Concilia 2/2
(1908), p. 759. There was apparently a copy in the library at Fulda ; see Gangolf SCHRIMPF,
Mittelalterliche Bücherverzeichnisse des Klosters Fulda und andere Beiträge zur Geschichte der
Bibliothek des Klosters Fulda im Mittelalter, Fuldaer Studien 4 (Frankfurt, 1992), p. 125, item
Ba 243, 'Beda super Ioannem', in the fourteenth-century catalogue.
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN 10ANNEN
79
183ν) first printed by de Gagny, neither of which is attributed to an author61.
Both commentaries are written on 49-50 lines in the outer column, the inner
column being reserved for the text of the Gospel. The manuscript probably
once also contained commentaries on Matthew and Mark.
The author of the Ps. Bede commentary on John evidently had a manuscript
which contained the first five books of Alcuin since he used them. A careful
study of the commentary on John 13-21 might tell us where the work was
created or by whom ; Augustine's Tractatus in Euangelium Ioannis is the main
source for the new part, as Schönbach noted62. If Bischoff's attribution of
Vatican Reg. lat. 307 to Lyons in the second quarter of the ninth century is
correct, Florus of Lyons or one of his students could have created this
commentary on John 13-2163.
2. An unpublished reworking of Alcuin's commentary, which has been
attributed to Hrabanus Maurus, Walahfrid Strabo and Ercanbertus of Freising,
was put together before the year 850, to judge from the date of the oldest
manuscripts. The work was described as 'eine bloße Bearbeitung des Johanneskommentares von Alchuin' by Schönbach 64 . The work is found in three
manuscripts 65 :
61. André Wilmart was unaware of the editio princeps of the work which was reprinted by
de Roigny, Herwagen and then by Migne; Codices Reginenses 2 (Vatican City, 1945), p. 155158.
62. SCHÖNBACH, p. 34-42. No manuscript of the work is given by STEGMÜLLER 1680.
63. According to Célestin CHARLIER, «Les manuscrits personnels de Florus de Lyon»,
Mélanges E. Podechard (Lyons, 1945), p. 80-81, Florus entered the note, TOH', in many
manuscripts with a view to preparing a commentary on John. If passages so marked with ΊΟΗ'
in Florus' manuscript of the Tractatus in Euangelium Ioannis correspond to those actually used
in the work on John 13-21 printed in PL 92.800-938, then we would know Florus was the
compiler, but there is no manuscript of this work in Lyons, and unfortunately neither Charlier
nor Wright lists a manuscript which might have passed through the hands of Florus. It would
seem that his manuscript is no longer extant. Florus composed a poem on the Gospel of John :
MGH Poetae aeui carolini 2, p. 518-523.
64. SCHÖNBACH, p. 114, with analysis and discussion of sources, p. 112-129, who
suggested it was compiled by Walahfrid Strabo. In his 1903 article, Schönbach mentions that
the work was in the Karlsruhe and Wolfenbüttel manuscripts, but he did not know of the Berlin
manuscript described in Rose's 1893 catalogue or the 1899 edition of the preface of
Ercanbertus. See Silvia CANTELLI, «L'esegesi della rinascita carolingia», La Bibbia nel
medioevo, ed. Giuseppe CREMASCOLI & Claudio LEONARDI (Bologna, 1996), p. 187, n. 72,
who cites P. MICHEL & A. SCHWARZ, Unz in obanentig: Aus der Werkstatt der karolingischen
Exegeten, Alcuin, Erkanbert und Otfrid von Weissenburg (Bonn, 1978), p. 55. The incipit and
explicit are : 'Inter omnia diuinae historiae uolumina euangeliorum libros arcem constat
possidere dignitatis ... curemus per omnia ut recta fide intellegendo, recta operatione exercendo,
quae docuit, ad dona perueniamus sempiterna quae promisit.'
65. The Ps. Bede commentary on Matthew found in one of these manuscripts, Karlsruhe
Aug. CIC, is a ninth-century compilation printed for the first time by Herwagen in 1563 (vol.
5, col. 1-130 ; PL 92.9-132 ; STEGMÜLLER 1678 = STEGMÜLLER 7061) According to
SCHÖNBACH, p. 34, the work is drawn from the commentary of Hrabanus Maurus (PL
107.727-1156, STEGMÜLLER 5.7060), but see Brigitta STOLL, «Drei karolingische Matthäus-
80
MICHAEL GORMAN
Berlin Phillipps 1731 (Rose 54), f. 9-92v, saec. IX 3/4, probably Northeast
France (Bischoff). Bischoff notes that the manuscript was probably in Laon in
the early Middle Ages and that the s-like marks in the margin could be by the
same hand which can be seen in Laon 37, Laon 38 and Laon 80. On f. 9 :
'Amantissimo ac omni dilectionis officio excolendo Ruodolfo preceptori
Ercanbertus suus deuotus alumnus.' The letter, addressed to Ruodolf of Fulda
(t865), according to Rose, was published in 1899 in MGH Ep. 5, p. 358-359.66
This preface could have been added by Ercanbertus to a work he found, in
which case this would be the presentation copy, the sole surviving manuscript
still bearing the name of Ercanbertus. The same breuiarium, a list of 14
capitula, which is found in the Ps. Bede commentary on John (PL 92.635-636)
Kommentare», Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 26 (1991), p. 36-55. Discussed by Robert
MCNALLY, «The Imagination and Early Irish Biblical Exegesis», Annuale Mediaevale 10
(1969), p. 17-19, and also in The Bible in the Early Middle Ages (Westminster, Maryland,
1959), p. 106. LAPIDGE & SHARPE 1269 among the dubia. It is found in at least six
manuscripts :
Fulda, Hessische Landesbibliothek Aa 19, 56 ff., 'saec. IX2, Bodenseegebiet'. 'Incipit
tractatus Hrabani abbatis in Matheum euangelistam.' on f. 1. Regina HAUSMANN, Die
theologischen handschriften der Hessischen Landesbibliothek Fulda bis zum Jahr 1600,
Codices Bonifatiani 1-3, Aa l-145a (Wiesbaden, 1992), p. 56-57.
Karlsruhe Aug. CIC, p. 15-178, saec. IX-X, Southwest Germany (Bischoff). Alfred
HOLDER, Die Reichenauer Handscriften (Karlsruhe, 1914) 1, p. 455.
Ljubljana, Narodna in univerzitetna knjiznica 18, f. 21v-163v, c. 1135, Prüfening (Golob).
As given by Milko KOS & France STELÈ, Srednjeveski rokopìsi v Sloveniji (Ljubljana, 1931),
p. 33-34 : 'Incipit explanatio libri primi uenerabilis Bede presbiteri super Matheum' on f. 21 ν
and 'Explicit liber IIIIus uenerabilis Bede presbiteri super Matheum' on f. 163v. Evidently the
only extant manuscript in which the work is not anonymous - here it is attributed to Bede. For
the date, see Natasa GOLOB, Cistercian Manuscripts from Sitticum XHth Century (London,
1996), p. 11-12 & 149-149.
Munich, Bayerische Staatsbibliothek Clm 3741, f. 8v-66v, saec. X (Bischoff ; his note is
dated 27 November 1928). Anonymous. The name written on f. 2, 'EBHS EPS', may refer to
Eberhardus, bishop of Augsburg (1029-1047), as Brigitte Gullath of the Bayerische
Staatsbiblothek has kindly informed me. The same work, Walahfrid Strabo on Matthew (PL
114.849-862, STEGMÜLLER 5.8326), is found in two of these manuscripts: Ljubljana 18, f.
10-21, and Munich Clm 3741, f. lv-8.
Nuremberg, Germanisches Nationalmuseum 3942, 95 ff., saec. IX2, 'mittleres
Westdeutschland' (Bischoff). 'EXPOSITIO IN MATTHAEI EVANGELIVM. Breuis explanatio
orditur super Matheum.' Anonymous. Hardo HlLG, Kataloge des Germanischen
Nationalmuseums Nürnberg: Die lateinischen mittelalterlichen Handschriften Hs 17a-22921 2/1
(Wiesbaden, 1983), p. 38-39.
Wolfenbüttel, Herzog August Bibliothek Weissenburg 60, f. 2-76, Southwest Germany,
saec. X in. Anonymous. Incomplete (PL 92.9-119). Hans BUTZMANN, Kataloge der HerzogAugust-Bibliothek Wolfenbüttel: Die Weissenburger Handschriften (Frankfurt, 1964), p. 198200.
66. On Ercanbertus the grammarian, perhaps the same person, see MANITIUS 1, p. 490.
When he catalogued the manuscript in 1893 Rose did not know the same work was in the
Karlsruhe and Wolfenbüttel manuscripts.
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN WANNEN
81
appears on f. 9v-10 ; this index was evidently a separate element which was
floating around in the ninth century.
Karlsruhe Aug. CIC, p. 180-331, saec. IX-X, Southwest Germany
(Bischoff). The name of Hrabanus Maurus erased in the title on. p. 180.
Without the preface to Ruodolf or the list of 14 capitula.67
Wolfenbüttel Weissenburg 87, f. 1-68, saec. IX2, Upper Rhine area68.
3. The unpublished reworking of books 1-5 of Alcuin's commentary on John
in St Gall 258, saec. IX med.-3/4, perhaps copied near Reims (Bischoff), has
been studied by Silvia Cantelli 69 . This manuscript was copied from an
interpolated exemplar which contained many additional passages on John and a
new preface seems to have been written especially for it. The exemplar was
already heavily glossed and annotated. The twelve quires were written quire by
quire by many hands, perhaps as many as ten, who all display Irish
symptoms ; the end of a quire always coincides with a change of hand.
Afterwards, annotations were entered in the margins and between the lines in
the new copy by a schoolmaster whose students perhaps prepared it. The
master employed the sources marks 'AG' (Augustinus) and Ά Μ Β '
(Ambrosius) and wrote a Caroline minuscule with Irish symptoms. The book
thus represents the personalized working copy of books 1-5 of Alcuin which
was prepared for use in the classroom or while commenting on the Gospel of
John. Bischoff s opinion of the origin of the manuscript ('vielleicht in der
Nähe von Reims') could refer to the area of Soissons and Laon70, where Irish
learning was present in the middle of the ninth century71.
V. - PERSONAL COMMENTARIES ON THE GOSPEL OF JOHN
Several commentaries on John from the eighth and early ninth century
survive which essentially consist of excerpts from the Tractatus in Euangelium
67. Holder 1, p. 455. The notes on the Reichenau manuscript of J.B. Enbuber, the prior of
St-Emmeram who planned an edition of the commentary, are preserved in Munich Clm
15024/47, f. 1-96, saec. XVIII.
68. Hans BUTZMANN, Die Weissenburger Handschriften (Frankfurt, 1964), p. 250-251.
Butzmann knew that the same commentary was in the Reichenau manuscript, but did not know
of the Berlin manuscript.
69. CANTELLI, p. 37-42, has demonstated that Schönbach's attempt to view St Gall 258 as a
first recension of Alcuin's work was misguided. Donald BULLOUGH, «Alcuin and the Kingdom
of Heaven : Liturgy, theology, and the Carolingian age», Carolingian Renewal: Sources and
heritage (Manchester, 1991), p. 200-201, had arrived at similar conclusions in 1983, but
Cantelli examined the manuscript in detail.
70. CANTELLI, p. 36, n. 53.
71. Bischoff refers to 'the centre of Irish learning in the Laon-Soissons area' in his 1977
article, «Irische Schreiber im Karolingerreich», Mittelalterliche Studien 3 (Stuttgart, 1981),
p. 48.
82
MICHAEL GORMAN
Ioannis, comments and glosses. Their chief characteristic is that they are found
in only one manuscript. When we encounter commentaries preserved in only
one manuscript, we must ask ourselves if we do not have in front of us a
manuscript which was ordered for or even written by the author of the commentary. I believe the following works were prepared for inclusion in the
manuscripts which contain them and in some cases were perhaps copied out by
the same person who compiled them. These works were never designed to be
put into circulation or 'published', as we would say today. Some might have
originated as lecture notes or material for use in schools. They all seem to have
served essentially as personal notebooks on the Gospel of John.
1. The excerpts from the Tractatus in Euangelium Ioannis selected by
Theodulf, bishop of Orléans (t821) 72 , for inclusion in his compendium of
exegetical material, Paris lat. 15679, p. 369-40273.
2. The commentary on John in Angers 275, f. 30-44v, saec. IX in.
(Bischoff), which has been edited by Denis Brearley74.
3. The commentary on John in Vienna 997, f. 67-84v, a manuscript which
was copied about the year 800 (Bischoff), which has been edited by Joseph
72. On Theodulf, see Ann FREEMAN, «Theodulf of Orleans: A Visigoth at Charlemagne's
Court», L'Europe héritière de VEspagne Wisigothique, ed. Jacques FONTAINE & Christine
PELLISTRANDI (Madrid, 1992), p. 185-194
73. BISCHOFF, MLAC, p. 109, n. 84. Bonifatius Fischer refers to Paris lat. 15679 as
Theodulf s 'vademecum' ; «Bibeltext und Bibelreform unter Karl dem Großen», Karl der
Große: Lebenswerk und Nachleben, IL Das geistige Leben (Düsseldorf, 1965), p. 177-178 ;
reprinted Lateinische Bibelhandschriften im frühen Mittelalter (Freiburg, 1985), p. 138. This
important manuscript begins with Isidore on the Old Testament (p. 1-63) and Bede's XXX
Quaestiones in libros Regum (p. 65-75) and includes selections from Jerome on Isaiah (p. 85128) and the minor prophets (p. 129-225), excerpts from Gregory's Moralia (p. 227-293),
'Glose in expositione psalmorum de diuersis doctoribus' (p. 294-324), passages from Rufinus'
translation of Origen on the Song of Songs (incomplete since a quire is now missing after p.
324) followed by Justus of Urgel on the Song of Songs (p. 325-336), and material on the New
Testament : excerpts from Jerome on Matthew (p. 337-350), the Ps. Jerome commentary on
Mark (p. 350-354, Clauis 632), Ambrose on Luke (p. 354-367), Augustine on John (p. 369402), and the commentaries on Paul which have been attributed to a 'Ioannes diaconus' (p.
402-464 ; Clauis 952), the translation of John Chrysostom on the Epistle to the Hebrews
prepared for Cassiodorus by Mutianus (p. 464-474), and commentaries on the Catholic Epistles
(p. 474-486), Acts (p. 485-495), and on the Apocalypse (p. 496-504) ; these items were
identified by Ann Freeman and Paul Meyvaert. The sententiae on Kings, 'Incipiunt sententiae
expositae in Regnorum libris de diuersis doctoribus' (p. 75-83), is almost certainly an
unpublished work of Theodulf himself. According to Ann Freeman, who kindly sent me her
notes on this manuscript, Bischoff believed that a few words expanding and completing a title
on p. 219 may be in Theodulf s own hand.
74. Denis BREARLEY, «The Expositio Iohannis in Angers BM 275 : A Commentary on the
Gospel of St John showing Irish influence», Recherches augustiniennes 22 (1987), p. 151221. Wendepunkte 32. LAPIDGE & SHARPE 1268, amongst the Dubia. KELLY 97. Not in
STEGMÜLLER.
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN 10ANNEN
83
Kelly who notes that it 'relies almost completely upon one work, Augustine's
Tractatus in lohannis Euangelium' (p. xii)75.
4. Like other works discussed here, the very brief set of glosses on John
printed under the name of Christian of Stavelot (tpost 880) seems to be a
personal work, not intended for circulation76. These glosses, which would
repay a detailed study, probably got printed under Christian's name when they
were found in the same manuscript as his commentary on Matthew and
probably have nothing to do with him. The commentary and the glosses are
found together in Vienna 724, saec. X77. On the other hand, they could be his
notes for a commentary which was never completed. In this case as in many
others, the history of the printed editions illuminates the problem of this brief
text. The glosses were published together with Christian's commentary on
Matthew for the first time in Strasbourg in 1514, edited by Johann
Wimpheling and printed by Johann Grüninger, in an edition dedicated to Leo
X 78 . (The glosses on John were not included when Christian's commentary on
Matthew was published for a second time in Haguenau in 1530, edited by
Menrad Molther and printed by Johann Setzer.) The glosses were reprinted
from Wimpheling's edition in the Magna bibliotheca ueterum patrum
(Cologne, 1618), vol. 9/1, p. 947-949, and then in the Maxima bibliotheca
ueterum patrum (Lyons 1677), vol. 15, p. 179-181, and finally by Migne
under the title, Expositiuncula19.
5. The (unpublished) works on John 1.1-16.17 in Munich Clm 14311,
written in about the middle of the tenth century, 'Incipiunt Augustini dicta et
ceterorum', f. 150-162, and Tauca incipiunt ex commentario beati Augustini
et de omelia Gregorii excerpta', f. 162-220, evidently two separate works
which were joined together in the manuscript. The first commentary (f. 150162) is described by Kelly in the following terms : The work draws heavily
on the Fathers, especially Augustine's Tractatus in lohannis euangelium.
Source references appear in the margins (AG, AM, CAS) and in the text (AG,
75. CCSL 108C.105-131. Wendepunkte 31. STEGMÜLLER 1164. KELLY 98. LAPIDGE &
SHARPE
774.
76. PL 106.1515-1520. STEGMÜLLER 2.1928. On Christian, see the note of Jean-Paul
BOUHOT in Franz BRUNHÖLZL, Histoire de la littérature latine du Moyen Age 1/2 (Turnhout,
1991), p. 296-297, and M. L. W. LAISTNER, «A Ninth-Century Commentator on the Gospel
according to Matthew», The Harvard Theological Review 20 (1927), p. 129-149 ; rep. The
Intellectual Heritage of the Early Middle Ages (Ithaca, 1957), p. 216-236.
77. The description of this manuscript in Michael DENIS, Codices manuscripti theologici
Bibliothecae Palatinae Vindobonensis Latini aliarumque Occidentis linguarum, 1/1 (Vienna,
1793), item CX, col. 297-303, is still valuable.
78. The commentary on Matthew was studied by Sixtus Senensis (1520-1569) who cited a
variant reading he found in a now-lost uetustissimus codex 'quern Lugduni in bibliotheca
Franciscanorum manuscriptum inspexi'; Bibliotheca sancta (Lyons, 1575), vol. 2, p. 158. The
variant reading noted by Sixtus was reprinted in the 1618 Cologne edition, vol. 9, p. 934.
79. On these patristic bibliothecae, see Pierre PETITMENGIN, «Les patrologies avant Migne»,
Migne et le renouveau des études patristiques: Actes du colloque de Saint-Flour, 7-8 juillet
1975, éd. A. MANDOUZE and J. FOUILHERON (Paris, 1985), p. 16-38.
84
MICHAEL GORMAN
GG) ; occasionally the name is given in full, for example, Sanctus Hieronimus
(fol. 150)' 80 . The second commentary (f. 162-220v) is described by Wright as
a 'very fragmentary' use of the Tractatus. According to Wright, Bischoff
believed this was 'an insignificant compilation of Irish origin' 81 . These texts
should be edited and analyzed.
6. Exegetical material might well have been designed with the classroom in
mind, such as the quaestiones et responsiones on the Gospel of John which
were published (under the name of Salonius) for the first time in 1968. These
are based on several sources, of which the principal one is the Tractatus in
Euangelium IoannisS2. The work circulated in Germany in the eleventh and
twelfth centuries, and was apparently created there in the ninth or tenth ; the
oldest manuscript dates from the tenth century83. The genre of quaestiones et
responsiones may have been particularly useful when dealing with students of
Scripture.
80. Since Bischoff did not specify any folio numbers, Kelly (item 99, p. 422) assumed
Bischoff was referring to the commentary on f. 150-162. The next text in the manuscript seems
to be a continuation (f. 162-220), and Bischoff perhaps considered both texts to be one work of
Irish origin, although he did not specify any folio numbers (BISCHOFF, «Wendepunkte»,
p. 217 ; Eng. trans., p. 83, but not included in his catalogue) ; one of his favourite 'Irish'
characteristics, 'ut Augustinus in libro de urbe dei', occurs on f. 163ν, line 1. STEGMÜLLER
9943. (On the Matthew commentary in the same manuscript, f. 9-148v, perhaps the work of the
same teacher, see BISCHOFF, «Wendepunkte», p. 226, n. 86 ; Eng. trans., p. 157, n. 86.
KELLY 84.)
81. WRIGHT 1981, p. 71, who reports Bischoff s date for the manuscript: 'c. saec. X med.'
STEGMÜLLER 6.9944.
82. The anonymous work was published under the name of Salonius, the son of Eucherius
of Lyons, by Carmelo CURTÍ, Salonii episcopi Genauensis De Euangelio Iohannis, De
Euangelio Matthaei (Turin, 1968), and Due commentarli inediti di Salonio ai Vangeli di
Giovanni e di Matteo: Tradizione Manoscritta, Fonti, Autore (Turin, 1968). The oldest
manuscript is Karlsruhe Aug. CCV, f. 137-175v, saec. Χ ex.
83. See Jean-Pierre WEISS, «Salonius de Genève», Dictionnaire de spiritualité 14 (Paris,
1990), col. 247-250. For recent bibliography on the problem of 'Ps. Salonius», see Raffaele
S A VIGNI, «Il commentario di Alcuino al libro dell'Ecclesiaste e il suo significato nella cultura
carolingia», Letture cristiane dei Libri Sapienziali: XX Incontro di studiosi dell'antichità
cristiana, Studia Ephemeridis Augustinianum 37 (Rome, 1992), p. 277, n. 7. The author
'Salonius' was an invention of Brassicanus who attributed to him commentaries on Proverbs
and Ecclesiastes which he found in Vienna 1278, saec. XII, and published at Haguenau in 1532;
on Brassicanus, see my article, «The Commentary on Genesis of Claudius of Turin and Biblical
Studies under Louis the Pious», Speculum 71 (1997), p. 302-305. Since these two
commentaries are found with the works on John and Matthew in Vienna 807, saec. XII, Curti
extended the attribution of Brassicanus to them as well.
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN WANNEN
85
VI. - JOHN SCOTTUS AND AUGUSTINE'S TRACTATUS
Teachers and scholars adopted many different approaches to the Gospel of
John in the early Middle Ages, but the principal inspiration behind nearly all
of them was Augustine's Tractatus in Euangelium Ioannis. It is remarkable that
Augustine's Tractatus maintained its validity and influence even when studied
by a scholar like John Scottus Eriugena who was capable of reading Greek
works. According to Edouard Jeauneau, the work inspired both his homily on
John 1.1-14, which is found in at least fifty-four manuscripts,
«La source la plus évidente et la plus considérable de l'homélie érigénienne est comme on peut s'y attendre - le commentaire de saint Augustin sur l'évangile de
Jean»84.
as well as his commentary on John 1.11-29, 3.1-4.28, and 6.5-14 which
survives uniquely in Laon 81, f. 1-49, a manuscript annotated by John
himself85.
«On peut dire que Jean Scot a écrit son Commentaire ayant un œil fixé sur
l'évangile de Jean et l'autre sur les Tractatus in Iohannem d'Augustin»86.
That John's commentary is preserved in just one manuscript which dates from
the time of Eriugena himself leads me to think that it too is essentially a series
of comments which John wrote out himself, perhaps for use while commenting
on the Gospel in church or in a classroom, and that no attempt was ever made
to finish or publish it. Its intended audience was perhaps not a group of
readers. Rather, it was designed to assist John in his task as teacher.
VII. - THE STUDY OF THE GOSPELS IN THE EARLY MIDDLE AGES
Although biblical exegesis was considered to be one of the very highest
forms of intellectual activity in the early Middle Ages, it is not possible at the
moment to reach conclusions about the exegesis of the Gospels in the Carolingian period or present a meaningful survey of the exegetical material
written then, since the two most important Gospel commentaries from that era
remain unpublished : Wigbod's Quaestiunculae on the Gospels (probably
84. Jean Scot, Homélie sur le prologue de Jean, ed. Edouard JEAUNEAU, SC 151 (1969),
p. 64. LAPIDGE & SHARPE 702-703. PL 122.283-296.
85. According to Bischoff, this manuscript was written at Soissons, like many other
manuscripts of the works of John Scottus. See Bernhard BISCHOFF, «Irische Schreiber im
Karolingerreich», Mittelalterliche Studien 3 (Stuttgart, 1981), p. 52, n. 58. For the handwriting
of John in it, see Edouard JEAUNEAU and Paul Edward DUTTON, The Autograph of Eriugena
(Turnhout, 1996).
86. Jean Scot, Commentaire sur l'évangile de Jean, ed. Edouard JEAUNEAU, SC 180
(1972), p. 27. PL 122.297-348.
86
MICHAEL GORMAN
prepared for Charlemagne himself) 87 and the commentary on Matthew of
Claudius of Turin (who worked for Louis the Pious)88. Many early medieval
works on the Gospels remain to be discovered, published and analyzed. A
complete survey of the pre-Carolingian exegetical material on the Gospels,
including epitomes and abbreviated versions of patristic works like the one
published here, would illuminate a largely unknown era in the history of
biblical exegesis and lay the foundation for editing and studying the Gospel
commentaries produced in the Carolingian period89.
Michael GORMAN
Via Quadronno 9
I - 2 0 1 2 2 MILAN
[email protected]
SUMMARY : A previously unknown testimony to the influence of Augustine's Tractatus in
Euangelium Ioannis is the epitome of the work (compiled in the sixth or seventh century ?)
which is found in an eighth-century fragment in Paris lat. 10399 and in three ninth-century
manuscripts, Laon 80, Vatican Pal. lat. 176 and Vatican lat. 637. Several portions of this
epitome are published here for the first time. Augustine's Tractatus in Euangelium Ioannis
dominated attempts to comment on the Gospel of John in the early Middle Ages and the
commentaries produced in that period are discussed briefly.
RÉSUMÉ : C'est un témoignage jusque-là inconnu de l'influence des Tractatus in
Evangelium Ioannis d'Augustin que cet abrégé de l'ouvrage (compilé au VIe ou au VIIe s. ?)
trouvé dans un fragment du manuscrit Paris lat. 10399 (VIIIe s.) et dans trois manuscrits du IXe
s. (Laon 80, Vatican Pal. lat. 176 et Vatican Lat. 637). Plusieurs passages de cet abrégé sont
publiés ici pour la première fois. Les Tractatus in Evangelium Ioannis ont dominé les tentatives
de commenter l'Évangile de Jean, faites au début du Moyen Âge ; les commentaires, alors
publiés, sont ici brièvement discutés.
87. See my article, «Wigbod and Biblical Studies under Charlemagne», Revue Bénédictine
107 (1997), p. 40-76.
88. See my article, «The Commentary on Genesis of Claudius of Turin and Biblical Studies
under Louis the Pious», Speculum 72 (1997), p. 279-329.
89.1 thank François Dolbeau and Jean-Denis Berger for comments on an early draft, Franco
Gori and Adolf Primmer for notes on the manuscripts of Augustine's Enarrationes in Ρsalmos,
and especially John Contreni for information about Laon 80, as well as Bruce Barker-Benfield
(Bodleian Library), Monika Köstlin (Bayerische Staatsbibliothek), Birgit Ebersperger
(Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften), Natasha Golob (University of Ljubljana), Brigitte
Gullath (Bayerische Staatsbibliothek), Helmar Härtel (Herzog August Bibliothek,
Wolfenbüttel), and Anne-Marie Turcan (IRHT) who supplied assistance of various kinds. A
special word of thanks goes to Paul-Irénée Fransen who kindly made available to me his
valuable but unpublished thesis, «Le commentaire au Livre de Job du prêtre Philippe : Étude
sur le texte», which was presented for the degree of doctor of theology at the Facultés
Catholiques in Lyons in 1949. Ann Freeman and Paul Meyvaert identified the excerpts in Paris
lat. 15679.
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN IOANNEM
87
Appendix
[Tractatus 1-3, Io. 1.1-18: L, f. 1-3; P, f. 87-89; V, f. 126-126v]
In nomine patris et fìlli et spiritus sancii.
In principio erat uerbum. Qua similitudine intellegitur uerbum substantiate? Verbum et in ipso homine quod manet intus, quod uere spiritaliter dicitur,
5 quod intellegitur de sono, non ipse sonus. Nam cum cogitas dei substantiam,
hoc est uerbum de deo in corde tuo. Cum autem dicitur deus sonus est, quia
quattuor litteris et duabus syllabis constat.
Refer iterum animum ad illud uerbum quod habes in corde tuo, tamquam
consilium natum in mente tua, ut mens tua pariât consilium quasi proles mentis
10 tuae, quasi filius cordis tui est. Prius enim cor generat consilium ut aliquam fabricant construas. Vides tu quid facturus es, sed alius non miratur, nisi cum feceris
illud opus. Si autem ex aliqua fabrica laudatur humanum consilium, quale est
consilium dei, dominus Iesus Christus, id est, uerbum dei? Fabricam mundi
aduerte. Quale uerbum per quod facta est? Et non sola facta est fabrica mundi,
15 sed inuisibilia per illud uerbum facta sunt. Quamuis autem mutabilia per uerbum fiunt, ipsum uerbum inmutabile est, unde ait, In principio erat uerbum.
Idipsum est, eodem modo est, semper sic est ut mutari non possit, hoc est deus.
Ait ergo, In principio erat uerbum. In quo principio? In patre.
Et uerbum erat apud deum. Et quale uerbum?
20
Et deus erat uerbum. Et sine ipso factum est nihil
Non putes aliquid esse nihil. Peccatum quidem, uel homo cum peccat, siue
idolum, nihil est. Ergo i sta non sunt facta per uerbum, sed quaecumque facta sunt
naturaliter in creaturis, ab angelo usque ad uermiculum. Per quern factus est
angelus, per ipsum factus est et uermiculus. Sed angelus dignus cáelo, uermicu25 lus terra. Si poneret uermiculum in caelo uel si uellet angelos nasci de putriscentibus carnibus reprehenderes. Et tarnen prope hoc fecit deus. Nam homines de
carne nascentes, quid sunt nisi uermes? Et de uermibus angelos fecit. Si enim
ipse dominus dicit, Ego sum uermis, quis dubitat hoc dicere quod scriptum est in
lob, Quanto magis homo putredo et filius hominis uermis.
310.1.1 15 cf. Rom. 1.20
28 Ps. 21.7 29 lob 25.6
16 Io. 1.1
18 Io. 1.1
19 Io. 1.1
20 Io. 1.1
4 Verbum et - 7 constat] CCSL 36.5,12-15, 33-35 8 Refer - 11 feceris] 5,1-8 12 Si autem 14 aduerte] 6,12-15 14 Quale uerbum - 17 hoc est] 6,22-23, 16 bis-17, 13,3-4, 12,10-12 18
In - 20 est nihil] 21,4 bis-5 21 aliquid - 29 hominis uermis] 7,3 bis-7, 11 bis-12, 16, 18 bis8,28
12 illud opus] om. V 17 semper sic est] sic est semper V 18 In patre] om. V 22 nihil est]
om. V 22 sunt facta] facta P sunt L
88
MICHAEL GORMAN
30
Quare autem patimur multa mala a creatura quam fecit deus? Quia offendimus
deum. Numquid haec angeli patiuntur? Vt cum se homo erectauerit aduersus
deum abiectissimae creaturae pulicum subdatur.
Quod factum est, in ilio uita est. Pronuntia sic, Quod factum est, hic subdistingue, et deinde infer, in ilio uita est. Faber facit arcam. Primo in arte habet
35 arcam, deinde illam fabricando profert. Potest arca illa putrescere et iterum ex
ilia quae in arte est, alia fabricari. Nam arca in opere non est uita, arca in arte uita
est, quia uiuit anima artificis, ubi ista omnia sunt antequam proferantur. Quod
factum est transiit. Quod est in sapientia transiré non potest. Vt autem hoc
quisque capiat a lacte, id est, a Christo per carnem nato nutriat cor ut ad cibum,
40 hoc est, ad Christum a deo patre natum uerum deum perueniat, quia illa uita
quae in ilio est lux hominum est.
Hoc enim sequitur. Et uita erat lux hominum et ex ipsa uita homines inluminantur. Pecora non inluminantur, quia homo factus est ad imaginem dei, habet
rationalem mentem per quam possit percipere sapientiam. Vita ergo illa lux men45 tium et super mentes est et excedit omnes mentes. Sed stulti qui propter peccata
sua tenebrae sunt istam lucem quasi absentem esse cogitant. Vnde sequitur,
Et lux lucet in tenebris et tenebrae earn non conprehenderunt. Caecus in sole
praesentem habet solem, sed absens est ipse soli. Haec de diuinitate Christi dicta
sunt. Qui si sic ueniret ut deus in forma suae diuinitatis non ueniret eis qui
50 uidere deum non poterant. Sed secundum quid uenit? Quod apparuit homo. Quia
ergo sic erat homo, ut lateret in ilio deus, missus est ante eum magnus homo per
cuius testimonium inueniretur plus quam homo. Et quis est hic? Fuit inquit
homo. Et quomodo posset iste de deo dicere? Missus inquit a deo. Quid
uocabatur? Cui nomen erat Iohannes. Quare uenit hie? Vt testimonium perhiberet
55 de lumine ut omnes crederent per illum. Qualis iste qui testimonium perhibet de
lumine? Illum mirare, sed tamquam montem. Mons autem in tenebris est, nisi
luce uestiatur. Sed mons iste ad hoc creatus erat ut prior radiatus excipiat et
oculis salutis lucem nuntiet. Vnde de eo sequitur,
Non erat Ule lumen. Quare uenit? Sed ut testimonium perhiberet de lumine.
60 Vtquid hoc? Vt omnes crederent per illum. Et de quo lumine testimonium perhiberet? Erat inquit lux uera quae inluminat. Erat quidem Iohannes lux, sed non
uera, nisi enim non inluminaretur, tenebrae esset. Et Paulus non credentibus ait,
Fuistis aliquando tenebrae.
Vbi autem est ipsa lux quae inquit inluminat omnem hominem uenientem?
65 Ipsum Iohannem inluminauit, sed si illinc non recederet, non esset inluminan33 Io. 1.4 42 Io. 1.4 47 Io. 1.5 51 Io. 1.5
1.8 6110.1.9 63Eph. 5.8 64 Io. 1.9
52 Io. 1.5
54 Io. 1.5
54 Io. 1.7
59 Io.
30 Quare - 32 subdatur] 9,3-5, 9-10, 8, 12 33 Quod factum - 37 proferantur] 9,19 bis, 21-22,
10,1-3, 7-11 37 Quod factum - 41 hominum est] 22,14-15, 10,21-27 42 Hoc enim - 44
sapientiam] 10,1 bis-6 44 lux mentium - 46 cogitant] 22,30-31, 11,1-5 47 Et lux - 48 dieta
sunt] 11,5-6; 22,7 bis-9, 12,3 49 si sic - 58 nuntiet] 14,39-40, 42-8, 10-11, 16-17 57 mons
iste] 2,4 ter 59 Non erat - 63 tenebrae] 14,17-4, 14,8 bis-12 64 Vbi - 68 carnem] 15,1-3,
15,20-3 bis
38 autem hoc] hoc autem V 52 est] om. L 54 uocabatur] uocatur V 56 Illum mirare] illuminare V 57 creatus] erectus V 62 non] er. P
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN IOANNEM
70
75
80
85
90
95
100
89
dus. Ideo autem hic inluminandus, quia illinc recessit, ubi homo semper poterat
esse inluminatus. Quid ergo? Si uenit hue, ubi erat? Hie erat per diuinitatem, hue
uenit per carnem.
In mundo inquit erat et mundus per eum factus est. Deus non extrinsecus est
ad illud quod facit, sed infusus mundo praesentia maiestatis facit quod facit,
praesentia sua gubernat quod fecit.
Et mundus eum non cognouit. Non creatura non agnouit creatorem suum, sed
mundus, id est, dilectores mundi corde habitantes mundum dicuntur non cognouisse.
In sua propria uenit, quia ista omnia per ipsum facta sunt.
Et sui eum non receperunt. Qui sui? Homines quos fecit. Iudaei quos primitus
fecit super omnes gentes esse. Et per carnem quam suseepit sibi cognati, sed si
omnino nullus eum recepit, nullus ergo saluus factus est.
Sed addidit, Quotquot autem receperunt eum, dedit eis potestatem filios dei
fieri. Ad hoc enim uenit unigenitus soluere peccata ut quos sibi fratres per gratiam adoptauit, faceret sibi coheredes. Uli ipsi quidem ilio possidente fiunt
hereditas ipsius, ut ait, Et dabo tibi gentes hereditatem tuam. Sed ille uicissim fit
hereditas ipsorum, ut ait, Dominus, pars hereditatis meae et calicis mei.
Qui non ex sanguinibus maris utique et feminae, neque ex uoluntate carnis.
Carnem pro femina posuit, ut Adam de Eua ait, Et caro de carne mea.
Sed ex deo nati sunt ut homines nascerentur ex deo, primo ex ipsis natus est
deus. Ideo cum dixisset, ex deo nati sunt, ut ad credendum te securum faceret,
ait, Et uerbum caro factum est. Quid ergo miraris, quia homines ex deo nascuntur? Adtende ipsum deum natum ex hominibus, quia uerbum caro factum est et
habitauit in nobis. Ipsa natiuitate collirium fecit, unde tergerentur oculi cordis
nostri et possimus uidere maiestatem eius per eius humanitatem. Vnde
sequitur,
Et uidimus gloriam eius. Quam utique nemo possit uidere nisi carnis humilitate sanaretur. Omnia enim colliria et medicamenta nihil sunt nisi de terra. De
puluere caecatus es, de puluere sanaris. Nam consentiente anima affectibus carnalibus, caro te excaecauerat.
Et quia uerbum caro factum est, caro te sanat quo medi cus iste fecit tibi collirium. Et quia sic uenit ut de carne uitia carnis extingueret et de morte occideret
mortem. Ideo potes in te dicere, Et uidimus gloriam eius, ad quam gloriam perducta est acies hominis curata per carnem.
6910.1.10 72 Io. 1.10 75 Io. 1.11 75 Io. 1.3 76 Io. 1.11 79 Io. 1.12 82 Ps. 2.7 83
Ps. 15.5 84 Io. 1.13 85 Gen. 2.23 86 Io. 1.13 88 Io. 1.14 89 Io. 1.14 93 Io.
1.14 97 10.1.14
69 In mundo - 71 fecit] 16,1 bis, 16,8 bis-9, 11-12 72 Et mundus - 73 habitantes mundum]
23,24-25, 30-31 75 In sua - 78 saluus factus est] 17,1-4, 6-9 79 Sed addidit - 83 calicis
mei] 17,1 bis, 13-15, 18-21, 23-25 84 Qui non - 85 de carne mea] 18,5-6, 16-18 86 Sed ex
- 90 in nobis] 18,2 bis-19,3, 19,13, 15-19 90 Ipsa natiuitate - 91 per eius] 19,2-4 bis 93
nemo possit - 96 excaecauerat] 19,6 bis-7, 19,12-15 97 caro te - 100 per carnem] 19,1423
79 autem VAug.] om. LP 81 Uli] Ilium V 90 tergerentur LAug.] unguerentur PVB 97 Et]
ItemPV 98 ut] et V
90
105
110
115
120
125
130
135
MICHAEL GORMAN
Plenum gratia et ueritate. Gratia et ueritas qua plenus apparuit unigenitus Al­
ius dei, quia res est noui testamenti et ueteris testamenti.
Hic distinguitur dicens, Hie erat quem dixi, Qui post me uenit, ante me factus
est. Post me uenit et praecessit me. Non factus est antequam essem ego factus,
sed antepositus est mihi, hoc est, ante me factus. Quare ante te factus est, cum
post te ueniret? Quia prior me erat.
In principio erat uerbum, et uerbum ad quem pater ait, Ante luciferum genui
te. Qui ante luciferum generatus est, omnes ipse inluminat qui inluminari possunt. Ideo sequitur,
Et de plenitudine eius nos omnes aeeepimus, id est, de plenitudine misericordiae eius, de abundantia bonitatis eius.
Et gratiam pro gratia aeeepimus primo de plenitudine eius gratiam et rursum
aeeepimus gratiam pro gratia. Quam gratiam primo aeeepimus? Fidem. Vtique
qua peccata dimitterentur, quae non praecedentibus meritis, quasi merces reddita, sed quia gratis data, gratia uocata est. Sed et hoc promiserat deus per
prophetas, itaque cum uenit dare quod promiserat, non solum gratiam dedit, sed
et ueritatem. Nam exhibita est ueritas, quia factum est quod promiserat.
Quid est autem gratiam pro gratia? Hoc est, iustificati ex fide pro gratia
fidei gratiam aeeepimus uitae aeternae. Si enim fides gratia est et uita aeterna
quasi merces est fidei, quia fides ipsa gratia est et uita aeterna, gratia est pro gra­
tia.
Lex enim per Moysen data est quae languorem ostendebat, non auferebat, sed
illi praeparabat medico uenturo cum gratia et ueritate. Tamquam ad aliquem
quem curare uult medicus, mittat primo seruum suum ut ligatum illum inueniat et
amari s acribusque medicamentis curet tamquam dicens, quod times pati pro te,
prior patior pro te. Haec est gratia humilitatis Christi. Vnde sequitur,
Gratia et ueritas per Iesum Christum facta est. Per seruum lex data, reos fecit,
per imperatorem Christum indulgentia data, reos liberauit. Et ne forte aliquis
dicat, gratia et ueritas non est facta per Moysen qui uidit deum, statim subiecit,
Deum nemo uidit umquam. Et unde innotuit Moysi deus? Quia reuelauit senio
suo dominus ipse Christus qui praemisit legem per seruum ut ueniret ipse cum
gratia et ueritate.
Sed unigenitus filius qui est in sinu patris ipse narrauit. Quid est, in sinu
patris? Id est, in secreto patris. Qui ergo patrem nouit et in secreto patris est,
ipse narrauit. Moyses uidit nubem, uidit angelum, uidit ignem. Omnis illa crea101 Io. 1.14 103 Io. 1.15 107 Io. 1.1 107 Ps. 109.2 110 Io. 1.16 112 Io. 1.16 118
10.1.16 118 Rom. 5.1 1221o. 1.17 1271o. 1.17 1301o. 1.18 1331o. 1.18
101 Gratia et - 102 noui testamenti] 20,1-4 103 dicens - 106 me erat] 23,2 bis-7 107 Ante 108 possunt] 23,12 bis-13, 24,19-20 110 de plenitudine - 111 bonitatis eius] 25,19 bis20 112 aeeepimus - 117 promiserat] 24,9-11, 22, 20, 19-20, 24-27 118 Quid - 126 pro gra­
tia] 24,1 bis, 25,15-16, 18-19 122 Lex - 124 inueniat] 25,1 bis, 26,2 bis-5 125 amaris - 126
est gratia] 27,8-9, 14-15 127 Gratia - 132 ueritate] 27,1 bis-4, 27,1 ter-6 133 unigenitus 135 ipse narrauit] 27,9 ter, 13-14 135 Moyses - 137 uideam te] 28,16-18, 21-22
101 qua] quia Ρ 102 ueteris] ueteri PV 104 est VAug.] om. LP 112 aeeepimus primo de
plenitudine eius gratiam et rursum aeeepimus gratiam pro gratia.] om. L 116 dedit] reddit
V 120 est] om. V 123 ad] om. L 128 Christum] om. V 129 gratia] et gratia V
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN IOANNEM
140
91
tura, typum domini gerebat, non ipsius domini praesentiam exhibebat. Quod sciens Moyses ad dominum ait, Ostende mihi temetipsum manifeste ut uideam te.
Quae in decalogo legis carnali adhuc populo iubentur eadem et nobis praecipiuntur. Sed illi carnalia nobis uita aeterna promittitur, unde ait, Haec est
uita aeterna ut cognoscant te unum uerum deum et quem misisti lesum Christum.
Cognitio ergo dei, hoc est, dilectio. Et ipsa est gratia pro gratia promittitur his
qui non sub lege, sed sub gratia sunt, ut ait, Vnam petii a domino hanc requiram
ut inhabitem in domo domini per omnes dies uitae meae et ut contemplar delectationem domini. Haec, ut dixi, gratiam pro gratia est.
145
[Tractatus 42, Io. 8.37-47: L, f. 34-35; P, f. 116-117; V, f. 140v-141; E, f. 42v-42]
Scio quia filii Abrahae estis. Agnosco carnis originem, non cordis fidem. Sed
quaeritis me interficere, quia sermo meus non capii in uobis, id est, non capit cor
uestrum, quia non recipitur a corde uestro. Sic enim debet esse sermo dei fideli150 bus tamquam pisci hamus. Tunc capit quando capitur.
Ego quod uidi apud patrem meum, loquor. Veritatem uidi, ueritatem loquor,
quia ueritas sum. Si ergo apud patrem uidit, se loquitur, quia ipse est ueritas
patri s quam uidit apud patrem.
Et uos qui uidistis apud patrem uestrum facitis. Talem adhuc patrem ipsorum
155 nominat cuius filii erant in quantum mali erant, non in quantum homines erant.
Pater noster Abraham est. Quasi, quid tu dicturus es contra Abraham? Eum
prouocant ut aliquid mali diceret de Abraham et esset occasio faciendi quod cogitabant, sed cum illorum dampnatione laudans Abraham dixit, Si filii Abrahae
estis, opera Abrahae facite. Nunc autem quaeritis me interficere, hominem qui
160 ueritatem locutus sum uobis. Abraham non erat homicida. Non dico, 'Ego deus
sum Abrahae'. Quod si dicerem, uerum dicerem, ut alio loco, Ante Abraham ego
sum. Sed quod me solum uidetis et putatis, 'Ego sum'. Ergo hominem dicentem
uobis quod audiuit a deo, quare uultis occidere, nisi quia uita non estis filii Abra­
hae?
165
Vos facitis opera patris uestri. Et adhuc non dicit quis est iste pater eorum. Uli
enim coeperunt utcumque cognoscere, non de carnis generatione dominum loqui,
sed de uitae institutione. Et quia consuetudo scripturarum est, quas legebant, fornicationem spiritaliter appellare cum diis multis, anima tamquam prostituta
subicitur. Ad hoc responderunt, Nos ex fornicatione non sumus nati, unum
137 Ex. 33.13 139 Io. 17.3 141 Io. 1.16 142 Ps. 26.4 147 Io. 8.37 151 Io. 8.38
10.8.38 15610.8.39 158 Io. 8.39 161 Io. 8.58 165 Io. 8.41 169 Io. 8.41
154
138 in decalogo - nobis] 29,1, 24,9-10 139 uita aeterna - 141 promittitur] 29,2-5 142 non 144 pro gratia] 20,13, 30,15-19 147 Scio - 150 capitur] 366,9, 12-15, 17-20 151 Ego - 153
apud patrem] 366, 2-3, 8-12 154 Et uos- 155 erant] 366,3-4, 16-17, 20-21 156 Pater - 163
filii Abrahae?] 367,1-2, 6-7, 1 bis-13 165 Vos - patrem nostrum] 368,8-15
138 carnali adhuc] carnali accepimus primo de plenitudine eius gratiam et rursum accepimus
gratiam pro gratia adhuc L 139 est V Aug.] om. LP 149 debet esse] esse debet V 152
ipse] ipsa Ρ 154 uidistis] audistis PV 154 uestrum] uel PV 159 facite L Aug.] facitis
PV 160 ueritatem LAug.] ueraPV 160 sum] sit L 161utPV]inL 161 ego sum VAug.]
om. LP 166 enim LAug.] autem PV
92
MICHAEL GORMAN
170 patrem habemus deum. Repulsi sunt ore ueridico, de Abraham genere gloriabantur. Ideo mutauerunt responsionem. Credo, dicentes apud semetipsos, nos Abraham imitare non possumus. Deum dicamus patrem nostrum.
Dixit ergo eis Iesus, Si deus pater uester esset, diligeretis utique me, id est,
agnosceretis me uel fratrem. Et erigens intellegentibus cor dixit, Ego enim ex
175 deo processi et ueni, neque enim a me ipso ueni, sed Ule me misit. Missio Christi
incarnatio est. De deo processit uerbum, ut deus aequalis, ut filius unicus et uenit
ad nos, quia uerbum caro factum est. Aduentus eius humanitas eius; mansio eius,
diuinitas eius. Diuinitas quo imus, humanitas qua imus. Nisi nobis fieret qua iremus, numquam ad illum manentem perueniremus.
180
Quare loquellam meam non cognoscitis? Quia non potestis audire sermonem
meum. Vnde audire non poterant, nisi quia corrigi credendo nolebant? Et hoc
unde?
Vos expatre diabolo estis. Quamdiu patrem commemoratis? Et patres mutatis?
Audite a filio dei cuius filii estis. Filii ergo erant diaboli non nascendo, sed imi185 tando, secundum scripturae consuetudinem, ut ad eosdem propheta ait, Pater
tuus Amorreus, et mater tua Cethea. Gentes utique alienae a ludeis.
Et desideria patris uestri uultis faceré. Ideo saeuitis in carnem quia non potestis in mentem.
Ule homicida erat ab initio.
190
Ipsi quaeritis me occidere hominem. Ille inuidit homini et occidit hominem,
ueneno utique mendacii serpens hominem. Nam serpente indutus locutus est
muli eri, et de muliere uenenauit et uirum. Mortui sunt, diabolum audiendo. Noli
ergo putare te non esse homicidam quando fratri tuo mala persuades. Haec
quando persuades, occidis.
195
Ab initio autem homicida erat, quia ex ilio homicida ex quo potuit fieri homicidium. Non enim posset occidi homo nisi prius fieret homo. Et unde homicida?
Et in ueritate non stetit. Ergo in ueritate fuit, sed non stando cecidit. Et quare
in ueritate non stetit? Quia ueritas non est in eo. Si iste in ueritate stetisset, in
Christo stetisset.
200
Mendacium ex propriis loquitur, quia mendax est et pater eius. Si ab alio mendacium accipisti et dixisti, tu quidem mentitus es proferendo mendacium, sed
pater ipsius mendacii non es, quia ab altero accepisti mendacium. Diabolus
173 Io. 8.42 174 Io. 8.42 180 Io. 8.43 183 Io. 8.44 185 Ezech. 16.3 187 Io.
8.44 18910.8.44 190 Io. 8.40 195 Io. 8.44 197 Io. 8.44 198 Io. 8.44 200 Io. 8.44
173 Dixit - 179 perueniremus] 368,4 ter-8, 11, 369,19-24 180 Quare - 181 hoc unde?]
369,1-5 183 Vos - 186 Cethea] 369,5-7, 24 bis-27 187 Et desideria - 188 mentem] 370,2-3,
21-22 189 Ille - ab initio] 370,4-5 190 Ipsi - 192 audiendo] 370,6-8, 371,24, 370,810 192 Noli - 194 occidis] 370,16-18 195 Ab initio - 196 unde homicida?] 370,2326 197 Et in - 199 stetisset] 370,26-30 200 Mendacium - 204filiummendacium] 370,1
bis-2, 371,4-10
170 genere gloriabantur L Aug.] gloriali genere PV gloriabatur E 172 imitare] imitari Aug.
emitan V 183 patre diabolo PV Aug.] diabolo patre L 185 propheta] om. Ρ 187 saeuitis
L Aug.] seruitis Ρ seruitus V 192 uirum V Aug.] uiri PL 196 homicida] homicida. Audi
psalmum, Filii hominum dentés eorum, et reliqua, ab hominum si E
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN IOANNEM
93
autem mendacium suum ipse genuit, a nemine audiuit. Quomodo deus pater
genuit filium ueritatem, sic diabolus lapsus genuit quasi filium mendacium.
205
Ego autem quia ueritatem dico, non creditis mihi. Quis ex uobis arguii me de
peccato? Quomodo arguo et uos et patrem uestrum.
Si ueritatem dico, quare uos non creditis mihi. Nisi quia filii diaboli estis.
Qui est ex deo, uerba dei audit. Propterea uos non audistis, quia ex deo non
estis. Hie naturarum merita discreuit, sed quoniam praescierat qui fuerant deo
210 credi turi, ut regenerationis adoptione renascerentur ex deo. Ad nos pertinet, Qui
est ex deo, uerba dei audit. Quod autem sequitur, quia ex deo non estis, dictum
est eis, qui praecogniti erant, quod non fuerant credituri.
215
220
225
230
235
[Tractatus 49, Io. 11.1-54: L, f. 41-43; P, f. 123-125; V, f. 144-144v; E, f. 43-43v]
Tres mortuos a domino legimus resuscitatos, filiam archisinagoge domo
iacentem, et iuuenem filium uiduae extra portas ciuitatis elatum, et Lazarum
sepultum quatriduanum. In cogitati one dilectamento peccati consensit anima,
sed cogitatum malum nondum processit in factum. Talis animae mors intus est.
Si autem ipsum malum fecisti, iam foras mortuus elatus est. Tertius mortuus est
Lazarus quatriduanus. Genus mortis immane consuetudo mala est, de quo dicitur 'fetet'. Incipit enim habere pessimam famam. sed de Lázaro hic dicere ordo
est.
Languens Lazarus a Bethania. Domino ultra Iordanem constituto infirmabatur
in Bethania Lazarus quod castellum erat proximum Hierosolimis.
Miserunt ergo sórores eius ad eum. Scilicet, trans Iordanem miserunt ad dominum ut dignaretur eum ab aegritudine liberaret.
Domine, ecce quem amas infirmatur. Non dixerunt, 'Veni et sana', ait, ut centuno dixit, 'Ibi iube et hic fiet', sed tantum Ecce quem amabis, id est, sufficit ut
noueris, domine, non enim amas et deseris. Lazarus autem per quem peccator
significatur a domino coronatur, quia ut Non ueni uocare iustos sed peccatores.
Infirmitas haec non est ad mortem. Verum quia et ipsa mors non erat ad mortem, sed potius ad miraculum, sed pro gloria dei, ut glorificatur fìlius dei. Ecce
dominus se deum dixit.
Dilegebat autem Iesus Martham. Ille languens, illae tristes. Diligebat eos et
languentium saluator, immo mortuorum resuscitator et tristium consolator.
Tunc quidem mansit in eodem loco duobus diebus. Hoc ei nuntiato tamdiu
205 Io. 8.45-46 207 Io. 8.46 208 Io. 8.47
Mt. 9.13 23210.11.4 235 Io. 11.5
223 Io. 11.1 225 Io. 11.3 227 Io. 11.3 230
205 Ego autem - 207 diaboli estis] 372,10-15 208 Qui est - 212 credituri] 373,6-8, 1017 215 Tres mortuos - 221 pessimam famam] 421,3, 5-12, 16-17, 20-21, 25-26 223
Languens - 224 Hierosolimis] 421,5 bis, 422,8-11 225 Miserunt - 226 liberaret] 422,37 227 Domine - 230 peccatores] 422,9-12 232 Infirmitas - 234 deum dixit] 422,1 bis-2, 56, 11-13, 8 235 Dilegebat - 236 consolator] 422,1 ter-423,4
203 Quomodo] Quo autem Ρ Quomodo autem V 207 uos] om. PV 210 renascerentur] nascarentur V 215 resuscitates] resciscitatos Ρ resuscitatos V 218 nondum] mundum LP 221
famam] famam. Ecce soror Lazari, quae pedes domini unxit ungento et tersit cum filiis suis.
Melius suscitatus E 223 Languens Lazarus] Lazarus languens PV 228 amabis LP] amas
Aug. amabas V 232 haec] autem haec PV 232 ipsa] ipse PV
94
240
245
250
255
260
265
270
MICHAEL
GORMAN
tempus duxit quousque quatriduum conpleretur, qui numerus dierum intimât
aliquod sacramentum.
Eamus in ludeam. Iterum qui inde discessit ut homo, sed in redeundo quasi
oblitus infirmitatem ostendit potestatem.
Hoc autem dicto discipuli territi, Dicunt ei, Rabbi, nunc quaerunt lapidare te
Iudaei. Respondit lesus, Nonne duodecim sunt horae diei? Redarguere uoluit
illorum infidelitatem. Voluerunt enim homine deo discipuli magistro semi domino aegroti medico, ut alio loco Petrus, consilium daret domino ne moriretur qui
uenerat mori, ne ipsi morirentur. Ait ergo, Nonne duodecim sunt horae diei? Si
quis ambulauerit in die non offendit. Me sequimini, si non uultis offendere. Si
enim sum dies et uos hora, numquid horae diei consilium dant? Horae diem
sequantur, non horas dies. In hoc autem uerbo non ipsum Iudam, sed successorem ipsius dominus praeuidebat, quo succedente duodenarius numerus mansit. Ergo horae inluminentur a die et per horarum praedicationem credat mundus
in diem. Hoc autem ait de compendio, 'Me sequamini, si non uultis offendere'.
Pater noster Lazarus dormit. Verum cum sororibus mortuus, domino dormiebat. Qui ut de lecto t u m facile excitabat eum de sepulcro.
Si dormit saluus erit. Solet enim esse somnus aegrotantium salutis indicium.
Dixit eis lesus manifeste. Subobscure enim dixerat, dormit.
Mortuus est, et gaudeo propter uos ut credatis quia non eram ibi. Hoc a u t e m
ait eis ut iam inciperent ammirari, quia dominus potuit dicere mortuum, quod nec
uiderat nec audierat. Quod autem ait, ut credatis. Intellegendum est ut amplius
robustiusque credatis.
Inuenit eum quattuor dies in monumento habentem. Quomodo in ilio caeco
intellegimus humanum genus, sic et in isto mortuo quatriduano multos intellecturi sumus. N a m habes unum diem mortis quod homo trahit de mortis propagine.
Itemque lex quod tibi non uis naturalis in corde scripta est quando hanc
transgrediuntur homines. Ecce alter dies mortis data est etiam diuinitus per
Moysen, Non occides. Lex et ipsa contemnitur. Adde tertium diem mortis. Transgrediuntur homines euangelium. Ecce quattuor dies mortis. Merito dicitur iam
putet, sed tales dominus excitare dignatur.
Si fuisses hic, frater meus nonfuisset mortuus, et nunc scio quia quaecumque
poposceris a deo. Non dixit, 'Rogo te, resuscites eum.' Vnde enim sciebat, si
237 Io. 11.6 240 Io. 11.7 242 Io. 11.8-9 246 Io. 11.9 253 Io. 11.11 255 Io.
11.12 2561o. 11.14 257 Io. 11.14-15 261 Io. 11.17 266 Ex. 20.12 269 Io. 11.21-22
237 Tunc quidem - 239 sacramentum] 423,5-9 240 Eamus - 241 potestatem] 423,1114 242 Hoc - 243 horae diei] 423,1-4 243 Redarguere - 245 medico] 423,15-16,
424,41 245 consilium - 249 non horas dies] 423,16-17, 424,42-44, 47-49 249 In hoc - 252
offendere] 424,51-54, 56-59 253 noster - 254 sepulcro] 424,1-6 255 Si - indicium] 425,3
bis-5 256 Dixit eis - dormit] 425,7-8 257 Mortuus est - 258 ait] 425,8-10 258 ut - 259
audierat] 426,14-15 259 ait, ut - 260 credatis] 426,21-22 261 Inuenit - 263 sumus] 426,34, 8-10 264 in corde - 268 dignatur] 426,18, 21-27, 30-33 269 Si - 272 tui est?] 427,510
240 Iterum] om. V 242 discipuli territi] territi discipuli PV 244 homine] homines V 246
sunt horae] horae sunt V 252 sequamini] sequimini Aug. 253 Pater L] Frater Ρ om. V ami­
cus Aug. 257 eram ibi] ibi eram PV 261 dies] dies iam Aug. 261 dies 263 sumus]
sumus, ut ait apostolus, Per unum hominem peccatum intrauit E 263 mortis] mortis peccatum PV 269 frater meus non fuisset mortuus] non fuisset mortuus frater meus PV
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN IOANNEM
95
fratri eius resurgere utile fuerit? Sed ait, 'Scio quia potes, si uis facis.' Vtrum
haud facias iudicii tui est?
Re sur get frater tuus. Hoc ambiguum fuit quando unde illa.
Scio quia resurget in nouissimo die. De illa resurrectione secura sum, de hac
275 incerta sum.
Ego sum resurrectio et uita. Ideo resurrectio quia et uita per quern tunc resurget potest et modo.
Qui credit in me, etiamsi mortuus fuerit, id est, in carne, uiuet utique in anima,
donee resurgat, caro numquam postea moritura.
280
Et omnis qui uiuit, id est, in carne, et credit in me, non morietur in aeternum,
etsi morietur ad tempus propter mortem carnis.
Credis hoc. Ait UH, Vtique, domine, ego credidi, quia tu es Christus filius dei.
Quando credidi quia tu es resurrectio, credidi quia tu es uita, credidi quia qui
credit in te, etsi moriatur, uiuet.
285
Silentio dicens, subpressam uocem silentium nuncupauit. Aduerte etiam quod
euangelista, breuitati studens, non dixerit ubi uel quando Mariam dominus
uocauerit, ut hoc in uerbis Marthae potius intellegeretur.
Secuti sunt earn dicentes, quia uadit ad monumentum. Hoc euangelista narrauit ut uideremus quae occasio fecerit ut illud tam grande miraculum testes plu290 rimo s inueniret.
Fremuit spiritu et turbauit se ipsum. Primo hic adtente potestatem et sic
inquire significationem. Turbaris tu nolens, turbatus est Christus, quia uoluit.
Quis enim eum posset nisi se ipse turbare? Iesus esuriuit, dormiuit, turbatus est,
mortuus est, sed quia iam haec uoluit. Nam in illius potestate erat sic uel sic
295 affici uel non affici. Verbum enim animam suscipit et carnem. Ac per hoc secundum summae potestatis nutum tractatur infirmitas, hoc est, turbauit semetipsum.
Nunc adtende significationem. Quid est ergo quod turbai semetipsum Christus,
nisi ut significet tibi quomodo turbari tu debeas cum tanta mole peccati grauatus
et pressus dicas. Quid facio? Quo eo? Vnde euado? Quando ista dicis iam
300 fremet Christus, quia fides fremei. In uoce frementis, sed apparet spes resurgentis. Audi adhuc, fleuit Christus fleat se homo. Quare enim fleuit Christus, nisi
quia fiere hominem docuit. Quare fremuit et turbauit semetipsum, nisi quia homo
sibi merito displicens fremere quodammodo debet in accusatione malorum operum.
305
Vbi posuistis eum? Scisti quia mortuus sit et ubi sit sepultus ignoras? Et ista
significado est, quia perditum hominem quasi nescit deus. Vnde in iudicio dictu273 Io. 11.23 274 Io. 11.24 276 Io. 11.25 278 Io. 11.25 280 Io. 11.26 282 Io. 11.2627 285 Io. 11.28 288 Io. 11.31 291 Io. 11.33 305 Io. 11.34
273 Resurget - ambiguum fuit] 427,1-2 274 Scio - 275 incerta sum] 427,3-5 276 Ego sum
- 277 et modo] 427,7-8, 17-18 278 Qui credit - 279 postea moritura] 427,17 bis428,19 280 Et omnis - 281 mortem carnis] 428,20-22 282 Credis - 284 uiuet] 428,2529 285 Silentio - 287 intellegeretur] 428,2-8 288 Secuti - 290 inueniret] 428,6 bis-8, 1112 291 Fremuit - 295 et carnem] 428,5 ter-15 295 Ac per hoc - 303 malorum operum]
429,22-4, 8-10, 430,37-40 305 Vbi - 310 et laborem meum] 430,1-13
279 postea] potestea PV 280 in aeternum, etsi morietur] om. PV 285 nuncupauit] uocem
nuncupauit PV 303 displicens LP] displicentis Ai/g. displicent V
96
310
315
320
325
330
335
340
MICHAEL GORMAN
rus, Non noui uos, id est, non uos uideo in luce mea et in illa iustitia qua noui.
Talis est uox dei in paradiso, postquam homo peccauit. Adam, ubi es? Domine,
ueni et uide. Quid est, Vide? id est, miserere. Videt dominus quando misererur ut
est, Vide humilitatem meam et laborem meum.
Ecce quomodo amabat eum. Non enim uenit uocare iustos, sed peccatores.
Non poterai hic qui aperuit oculos caeci faceré ut et hic non moriretur? Qui
potuit faceré ut non moriretur, plus est quod facturus est ut mortuus suscitetur.
Eremens in semetipso, uenit ad monumentum. Frémit in te si disponis uiscere.
Et lapis superpositus erat ei. Mortuus sub lapide, reus sub lege. Lex enim quae
data est Iudaeis in lapide scripta est. Omnes autem rei sub lege sunt, bene
uiuentes cum lege sunt.
Remouete lapidem. Remouete legis pondus gratiam praedicate. Littera enim
occidens, quasi lapis premens.
Quatriduanus est enim, Videbis gloriam dei. Quid est, Videbis gloriam dei?
Qui et putentem quatriduanum resuscitat. Omnes enim peccauerunt, et egent gloria dei, et, Vbi abundauit peccatum superabundant gratia.
Voce magna clamauit. Fremuit, lacrimauit, uoce magna clamauit. Quam difficile surgit, quem moles malae consuetudinis premit!
Mortuus ligatus et pedes et manus. Quomodo processit ligatis pedibus miraris
et non miraris, quia surrexit quatriduanus. In utroque paenitentia domini erat et
ligatus et inuolutus iam foras processit. Quid autem procedere, nisi ab occultis
uelut exeundo in confessione manifestari, sed ut confitearis, deus facit magna
uoce clamando, id est, magna gratia uocando. Ideo cum processisset adhuc ligatus confitens, et adhuc reus ut soluerentur peccata ministris hoc dixit dominus.
Soluite ilium et sinite abire. Quae solueritis in terra, soluta erunt in caelo.
Ex ipsis abierunt ad Pharisaeos, siue ex Iudaeis qui conuenerant eis quae fecit
Iesus, siue adnuntiando ut et ipsi crederent, siue prodendo ut saeuirent.
Et dicebant, Quid facimus? Plus cogitabant quomodo nocerent ut perderent,
quam quomodo sibi consulerent ne périrent. Et tarnen quasi consulerent, Dicebant. Si dimittimus eum sie, omnes credent in eum, et uenient Romani et tollent
nostrum locum et gentem. Quod utique euenit. Hoc autem timuerunt ne si
omnes in Christum crederent, nemo remaneret qui aduersus Romanos ciuitatem
dei templumque defenderet. Quoniam contra ipsum templum et contra suas
paternas leges doctrinam Christi esse sentiebant.
307 Mt. 7.23 308 Gen. 3.9 308 Io. 11.34 310 Ps. 24.18 311 Io. 11.36 312 Io.
11.37 314 Io. 11.38 315 Io. 11.38 318 Io. 11.39 320 Io. 11.40 321 Rom. 3.23 322
Rom. 3.20 323 Io. 11.43 325 Io. 11.44 331 cf. Mt. 16.19 332 Io. 11.46 334 Io.
11.47 335 1o. 11.48
311 Ecce quomodo - 313 suscitetur] 430,2 bis-7 314 Fremens - 317 lege sunt] 430,1 ter8 318 Remouete - 319 premens] 430,11 bis-13 320 Quatriduanus - 322 superabundant
gratia] 431,2-7 323 Voce magna - 324 premiti] 431,6 bis-8 325 Mortuus - 331 in caelo]
431,11-25 332 Ex ipsis - 333 saeuirent] 431,3 ter, 6, 8-9 334 Et dicebant - 340 sentiebant]
432,2-8, 14-17
312 Qui potuit faceré ut non moriretur V Aug.] om. LP 316 autem V Aug.] om. LP 323
uoce magna] uoce magna uoce magna V 326 paenitentia LP] potentia V 328 confessione]
consensione Ρ
THE OLDEST EPITOME OE THE TRACTATVS IN IOANNEM
345
350
355
360
365
370
375
97
Vt unus moriatur homo pro populo. Ecce per homines malos prophetiae Spiritus futura praedicat. Quod tarnen euangelista diuino tribuit sacramento, quia
pontifex fuit, id est, summus sacerdos, sed quomodo dicitur pontifex huius anni,
cum dominus unum constituent sacerdotem summum cui mortuo unus succederet. Sed intellegendum est per contentiones inter Iudaeos postea constitutum ut
plures per annos singulos uicibus ministrarent. Vnde et Zacharias dicitur sacerdotio functus in ordine uicis suae sorte exsisse ut incensum poneret. Incensum
autem non licebat poneré nisi summo sacerdoti. Et forte etiam unum annum
plures amministrabant, quibus alio anno alii succedebant, ex quibus sorte exibat
quis ut incensum poneret.
Pro gente et non tantum pro gente. Sed euangelista addidit, Nam Caiphas de
sola Iudaeorum gente prophetauit in qua erant oues ad quas uenit pastor. Sed
nouerai euangelista esse alias oues docendas ut esset unus grex.
Non palam ambulabat apud Iudaeos in qua discipulis exemplum demonstrauit
non esse peccatum, si membra eius furorem sceleratorum latendo potius diuitarent qui se offerendo magi s accédèrent.
[Tractatus 124, Io. 21.19-25: L, f. 79-80; R f. 160-161]
Et dicit eis, Sequere me, et cetera. Iterum dicit, Sic eum uolo manere donec
ueniam. Cur dicit Petro, Sequere me, nec dicitur ceteris qui simul sicut magistrum sequebantur. Sed si ad passionem intellegas, numquid non ibi erat in illis
septem filii Zebedei frater Iohannis qui ab Herode occisus est? Sed dicit quis,
quoniam non est Iacobus crucifixus, merito dicitur Petro, Sequere me, qui mortem crucis, sicut Christus, expertus est. Cur ergo de Iohanne dictum est, Sic uolo
manere donec ueniam, quid ad te? et repeti tum est, Tu me sequere, tamquam ille
ideo consequeretur, quoniam eum manere uoluit donec ueniat? Nam hanc opinionem qua illi crediderant illum moriturum, sed donec Iesus ueniret mansurum in uita. Iohannes ipse abstulit, non hoc dixisse Iesum declarans.
Sed dicat quis uerum esse quod Iohannes, non dixisse Iesum dominum, quod
discipulus ille non moritur, sed hoc significatum esse talibus uerbis et adseratio
Iohannem apostolus atque illos sepulcro eius apud Ephesum, dormire potius eum
quam mortuum tacere, adsumens in argumentum quod illic terra sensim scatere
quasi ebullire perhibetur, atque hoc eius anhelitus fieri adserit, quia puluis ab
imo ad superficiem tumuli ascendens flatus quiescentis inpelli creditur.
Si enim inquit quidam Moysen mortuum negant, quem scriptura ipsa mortuum esse testatur, quanto magis de quo dominus ait, Sic eum uolo manere donec
uenio, creditur unius dormire sub terra? Hucusque illi de ilio quern alii tradunt
quando sibi fieri iussit sepulcrum incolumen fuisse praesentem, eoque fosso dili341 Io. 11.50 351 Io. 11.51-52 354 Io. 11.54 359 Io. 21.19 364 Io. 21.22 365 Io.
21.19 3761o. 21.22
341 Vt unus - 350 incensum poneret] 432,3-14, 19-21 351 Pro gente - 353 alias oues]
432,24-433,28 354 Non palam - 356 accédèrent] 433,2-3, 6-11 359 Et dicit - 368 non hoc
dixisse] 680,8, 16-17, 19-681,37 369 Sed dicat - 373 anhelitusfieri]681,1-8 375 Si - 380
defunctum] 681,19-28
343 huius PV\ illius Aug. om. L 356 qui LP] quam Aug. qua V
98
380
385
390
395
400
405
410
415
MICHAEL GORMAN
genter praeparato, ibi eum se tamquam in lectulo collocasse, statimque esse
defunctum.
Si autem quod magi s credi tur ideo sanctus Iohannes ait, non dixisse dominum,
Non moritur, ne illis uerbis quae dixit, hoc uoluisse intellegi putaretur corpusque
eius in sepulcro exanime iacet. Restât ut si uere ibi sit quod sparsit fama de terra
ista, aut ideo fiat ut commendetur pretio<sa> mors eius, quoniam non earn commendat martyrium, aut propter aliquid aliud quod nos latet. Manet tarnen quaestio cur dixerit de homine morituro, Sic eum uolo manere donec ueniam.
Illud etiam in his duobus apostolis quemquam non moueat ad quaerendum,
cur Iohannem plus dilexerit dominus, cum ipsum dominum plus dilexerit?
Aut quis duorum sit meli or, utrum qui plus, an qui minus diligit Christum, quis
dubitauit responderé eum qui plus diligit esse meliorem? Item quis duorum sit
melior, utrum quern minus, an quern plus diligit Christus, eum qui plus diligitur a
Christo, meliorem procul dubio respondebimus. In ilia ergo conparati one prius
posuit Petrus Iohanni. In hac uero altera Iohannes anteponi tur Petro. Proinde tertiam sic proponimus: Quis est duorum discipulorum melior, utrum qui minus
quam condiscipulus eius diligit Christum, et plusquam condiscipulus eius diligit
Christo? An ille quem minus quam condiscipulus eius diligit Christus, cum plus
ipse quam suus condiscipulus diligat Christum? Hie plane cunctatur responsio.
Quantum autem ut ipse sapio, melior est qui plus diligit Christum, felicior est
quern plus diligit Christus, facile responderem. Si iustitiam Christi minus eum
diligentis a quo plus diligitur, et eum plus a quo minus diligitur, quomodo defenderem, peruiderem.
Adgrediar igitur Christo adiuuante de soluenda quaestione disputare.
Duas uitas sibi diuinitus praedicatas nouit ecclesia, quarum una est in fide,
altera in specie, una bona est, sed adhuc misera, altera melior et ideo beata. Ista
significata est per apostolum Petrum, ilia per Iohannem. Tota hic agitur ista usque
in huius saeculi finem, sed in futuro saeculo non habet finem. Ideo dicitur huic,
Sequere me. De ilio autem, Sic eum uolo manere donec ueniam, id est, Tu me
sequere per imitationem perferendi temporalia mala. Ille maneat donec maneat
sempiterna uenio redditurus bona? Quod apertius ita dici potest, perfecta me
sequatur actio, informata meae passionis exemplo. Inchoata autem contemplatio
maneat donec uenio, perficienda 'cum uenero'.
In hac autem actiua uita quanto magis Christum diligimus, tanto facilius liberamur a malo. At ipse minus diligit quales nunc sumus, et hinc ideo liberai, ne
semper tales simus. Ibi uero amplius nos diligit, quoniam quod a nobis auferat,
non habebimus. Nee ob aliud hic nos diligit, nisi ut sanet. Hic ergo minus ubi non
uult ut remaneamus. Ibi amplius quo uult ut transeamus. Amet ergo cum Petrus,
382 Io. 11.23 386 Io. 21.22 407 Io. 21.19 407 Io. 21.22
381 Si autem - 386 doncc ueniam] 682,13-23 387 Illud ctiam - 388 dilexerit] 682,1 bis3 389 quis duorum - 401 peruiderem] 683,28-45 402 Adgrediar - disputare] 683,1-3 403
Duas uitas - 411 cum uenero] 685,82-84, 101-107, 686,109-113 412 In hac - 418 seruemur]
686,124-133
400 quomodo] quemadmodum Aug.
THE OLDEST EPITOME OF THE TRACTATVS IN IOANNEM
99
ut ab ista mortalitate liberemur. Ametur ab eo Iohannes ut in ilia immortalitate
seruemur.
Sed cur Iohannes minus eum diligebat quam Petrus, si earn uitam significabat
420 in qua est multo amplius diligendus, nisi quia propterea dictum est, Volo eum
manere, id est, exspectare, donee uenio, quoniam ipsum amorem qui tunc multo
amplius erit, nondum habemus, sed tunc amplius quod uidebimus diligimus.
Hoc ergo per Petrum significatum est plus amantem, sed minus amatum, quod
minus amat nos Christus quam beatos miseros. Illud autem per Iohannem sig425 nifícatum minus amantem quod ueritatis contemplationem qualis tune futura est,
minus amamus, quia nondum nouimus, sed plus amatum, quia id quod per ilium
figuratum est, hoc efficit beatum.
Nemo tarnen istos apostólos separet. Et in eo quod significabat Petrus, ambo
erant. Et in eo quod significabat Iohannes, ambo futuri erant. Nee ipsi soli, sed
430 uniuersa hoc facit saneta ecclesia ab istis temptationibus emenda, in illa felicitate
seruanda.
Non enim iste solus, sed uniuersa ecclesia ligat soluitque peccata. Nec ille de
fonte dominici pectoris solus bibit, sed ipse dominus suum euangelium omnibus
suis bibendum toto orbe diffundit. Sunt qui senserint, a Christo Iohannem
435 propterea plus amatum quod ab ineunte pueritia castissimus uixerit. Congruenter ergo per eurn ilia uita significata est, ubi non erunt nuptiae.
Nec ipsum arbitror mundum capere eos qui scribendi sunt libros. Non spatio
locorum credendum est mundum capere non posse, quae in eos scribi quomodo
possent, si scripta non ferret? Sed capacitate legentium conprehendi fortasse non
440 possent, quamuis salua fide rerum, plerumque uerba excedunt fidem, sed sicut
uerba rem quae indicatur excedunt, ut uoluntas loquentis appareat, a quo ultra
quam credendum est, uel minuitur loquendo aliquid uel augetur. Hunc loquendi
modum hiperbolen uocant qui saepe in diuinis litteris inuenitur, ut est, Posuerunt
caelo os suum, et Verticem capali perambulantium in delictis suis. Sed et alii
445 tropi in scripturis Sanctis non desunt.
420 Io. 21.22 421 Io. 21.22 437 Io. 21.25 443 Ps. 72.9 444 Ps. 67.22
419 cur - 422 uidebimus] 686,8-13, 16-17 423 Hoc - 427 beatum] 687,25-29, 31-33 428
Nemo - 431 seruanda] 687,1-3, 6-8 432 iste - 436 nuptiae] 687,17-18, 22-28, 31-32 437
Nec - 445 desunt] 688,5-10, 14-23
430 ecclesia] ecclesia sponsa Christi Aug.
iwf»
0
t p&Lmo***»*·*
fSJUnatf* Φ*Η*Φ{* ©p¥oiwr
tt#re<*p#4#««l<H?j^ «#«l&«¿%»«l*ne- p f x W r t * I*U*W* * 1n«nc*f*xm*"
f*
Ceraio cvn*.tt4o tftOOfN* urpadT*?*«
p«rtaui.»#îel**»t#i*« u 4 r * «fMfle#l»*« m?r*M**m
< l e f t w « n i #4*wre&m »«'«p
-ï*hr «i*»r ^*oic*r<f*»*A»*» LM»|T«W J%«t#m -«p**·* pr*»!»***'·' ¿ A a e t M * « · ^ pM**n
c#5**o<Vtti y £ «JtfjSer«*».*·· ' ¿tut Χ «|«*oiweitr tftrm*jue- t**«l#- eoj**»·***-'' -*3o**p
» « » r t a w r w tm
f m t * - kmA&mmmP
u. 66*»*** f?tnootir«rrcfet*^
SJPPXT-&: olfcumaKT
butur
ftnt&C lecrv&t 1»&» *&#***«
****&**% n#« tpfî» *|t»m TW*l#**t pf*á*4*«ií* l&p***"*
ffetfwi • ¿ 3 U c — i' €»m **r«|«i*»' iaxéveort***
/M*** ^ w p · ! ! « · * • * » · 1*#*#Γ*Χ***»»«
k x W r ^ c r r J x T t i r - < 5 / * M » « c c p * o J * e x * J e m xJpcr-"*m*^e*£**«»**#::' £ t * * f
J e * # 4 p ^ttt4 tneo porrTrr, p r o r f u r t j ^ t o r * f & # r o w « í t t ανχΙ«<|»««ΐ p o r
fr«, Afftixwt-««,
λ
1
τ ^ A.ciiu«rbTnum «Jmí flace*» x a t « * « | í > r m e n « f
t 4 * t j e r * ^ <|tt«profVrrfctrrttr- tnpopttl*r«p**r Jr**** α*»Λ*λΤ aooxire·; f V d
fît- Woe uf^u«- f r o . ^ n m m J i ^ «¡I -e- tp#* efl·
a« fU*n φτ
iot^Atnàtxmat^o
tfbr
Prxe4o«*tt*^dw'A]>^*orJt© f$w» W x j n a f p f w l w m r i f l * - CV
nrfTtni -e?c tor-jacra*- n o r x e t l e j e c r v u · » « * ^ <yuxm w****o £ $ r <^a« « » " Ç *
p#*rööC«|tttf #m*»· aftpur a c ^ f « ^ B « ^ . » o l p o T « t « ^ . t t « 4 p o i ^ r t « r lnu9n*r%cyut n o L i - oYY^ t>f-*t*«r «jfrnJiyrrur- ^ t e r - e c r i e i M K öpttT e $ - x J # * * » t
rftti c»ux*n f&i^rpotrctr AppöVnr x n v m t i f Iw«nxn«»f*i ****** ψν^^Ηη»
fC¿>
«ρ* ι φ*
È»ot-*acBt»f u a x j w . u r ^ e n v ^ u t ^ uoLumcter #*t*f* <?»*** *f*& XjprtríX*»«*««
p r o p x * t ~ cjuo«/$xl>or-OiTiomr XaJinkoVur- xlL>cjuiu<m . « W ^ U M I # r ^ o
.]
îtaltfcum ¿grcut* u r u f l w u r cjuod n o i l f ttonpof f&*««*f ·Μ*π" «f*«** «""«•**
^ m d f · plàcet-rudi«^ C o n e u p i r c u ^ v ffcJ «f**«^
mo«lo X******* péV*«*·-
nijcrur p i u m * » nef*π « τ τ τ ι J^o «^uxe- l»o« «JoceV t A * " *f«** metv*.
Ο π α 3*4«r»xcciLx.Ti I A I C I I X < J U I J L * I » J B » « L X * * · ^ i > * i ^ ^ ç ^ *
, ^ > A . X Á » t , € j u x » « «licordV feto «jute!
tt#Lr.i»#«0nTuJti«4p
fer^o e T f V Ulf* t u t e u r . f f V o t n m x c u L n i r til»*«! «*t**H
t
«f^*·«**·
9*nn§r-h9c
PALICI aoLunx!-' í > J ttot errcr autfcvuxo^ tnmj^ttljNisPttf*·*»*^ t*taiX
twcruce uijc ntfT Iniej*
«*5t Xcp«p^ |TOC JÊ^e"an **»«H*.4P«UÖP« fe««*X*«f«*•"• ·
Μ
yfe
U4r **ki> J«^Cxm *|ttir <f& Lot *it».Attr J#^«wrn«^«rtxCY«prtr Çïer«»
euifauir HUÍ π
1. Berlin Phillipps 1657, f. III.
jpitÄdiwpte&uimr^
¿fu u intigno
ftMd*mœtttt%Mêtfmr*riïl A^mtrruJWn*-fpfíA¿>r*iur4íca*m¿fr.
IkWrnX*
mftmrntmmbtneatMmMrornntfqvrntf'
CutuftmtwfYìbtftUufAtlfAcnftctimique
ffp^tmmeiWuf4ue#è»^r;fìaiT4^Ap^
i X~{mcàtquàfrmhràrus1} edk&tésdtttmqm4¿tc*m?yuoéprojiheTU4iufA4amrt0f
beqatotk:
g*m*fp*r~an#lMsr· í^tfftaUtfaiK&CATurpfXlmufXtbthocnanft^^
5"^
qfbáfmmcx#trt£qnrfT^
ι b :<rerrttbuf· Çuxtmma rúo fu rrrer. fit ft
K^uiàc*rmiuiX^i^cpiJk*n*iAitûrt™
demovwtfmemmt
huf-tvfrerp ffltomnurespxt*nw
·
\j&ftâX^fft*fcquhyp
bM*pA&âtf*a*rmf
Ùem&nvtid*:cUr^aiudA£vrvpr*teM
2. Laon 80, f. 6 (Martin's annotations).
0i*mtU.
fdefpuflßUqu
'tu p*trr<*r-
^nmtka.xàùn
j räum
rfyr
amoucrr-- S.<xrcmnaûU
œxnof:m
rniMAMtrvmn(mU\brbs>
nrlxbwmr
êuerfuffrmit\cem> \} Hfrs^ntrxdea^"* fomxprrt'enfc? <*'écr«iul*rr-ct*k*mkt'
Ctfk'n·
^Andumuprvrrr^^AVpeiUrti-muiurTreeemtl·
itm
.»TV>r
i =f - f
twtf" rrdi<k
¿rk*»-*^*-..«,*<«· .cîturner* quM**dauen.\
¿¿utrrvxrr- \ pfttfi fuorvi*f e6¿df· öpor~ct4>Jn tivnxdorxr* ^m^ornreorperCO
4£ifKtmfl*t<#f#rt0
DfefHff· &eefqmxdmtn
mffu *f*r~^ xd^rit
W„#f
f
drtíuAÜfcuf furrwrn νρα&ώ<ν'ρπ>ρ ln-nuΧààn*mA*cr:au\xquêmffif\*êavin
dnarxx wânAixÀocerrquxâàmfiuftrXlttt
j ο*»**Τ f
ftAfuemO&mfnx.' IÜemAtf^^mxJtm<mf\rrd'
Wmfytrméí ó¿*rmfí*#m f
mx*f~tsá¿< \4*t*nfpu é*uertrxx&n0utrimuf.Kcli>j~»rP~ ílhurqv éiqrt.Ktrxx cuutivtj.
s
f
f
<*rttf«ajiffflWtf&r'
tdwiuyndictr
jc*í><f «untiti
rf»'vrí"
Γ ΐί<Ίιί»Γ ^
i^^îAt^^furrt l.i«tfiuítfcw» itie^Mi^linuiA' ptintCA.·<νΓ» 'H.f* ,o*>n ·Γ*1><**ΤΚΠ?Μ
Uj*t\Vtm}mtr*\»tmw~J*iMm\uu*htwuirn*rtmxLimi
4¿*M»£d« w *
n.r • f^eí¿<fwf4
curt*rA¿. Ρ nm*crr*«p< Jrarrem ¿¿p*~©ρmuj rr .¿M«u*rrfar*~
Γ Α Ξ ^ Λ Α ^*·»******"1•Grrtfx^uxUtÀtre^tfráíétcertruir·*
nndê^ràrtxAppeiLxxitr
Γrottettnçokrdrtxmtx-(wet
kï.
3. Laon 80, f. 12v (marginalia)
TjM4tuanfUqtt*#i
r *&i*v«». .wui£¿ccurr*í**r
tf
f
f
<*rtrzhj&H**1îcâoàtt%mq g<tp™¿° uñieftqutwr ( 3 τfâoqutÄtiwicferv«?
aufun*xâamA r Ç tàwoAtCtm*. ipfcfiltuf éCunxA&ernx f mxnàxtû
pxinf quoáxhudOKTÚ équxme^fâmmdacûpxmf'* unaexewn^ >
C 1 UAtmAjûûuor '" fîarrdttfrr mita p<*rfr fkto<fuor · Non ACO piAmufcJixu wtUt
a»j^lptifrtAÍiíc«t«ftír y umcoue&o Qjixû^xuté'^cmiAiytftmthîfiéfîA.o^uishrr
»ttfti*rtutaqu<*r ftAitWijfutufrvc ft*jftrU<|fmur wruerttaf ueî^*AWgr
mstrumtfttr- Ptxrtfrgoueraxumciti rçmAg*mn* urrtr*tf fWrotpfAuen
Tâfffctaqumjr ansietà f
fàlim*4i|j^
Hiutmaf
loqurturfrm*(I*jifTmb-mfTTn(?- tmufftfirfanomftrurc · Qttferjiífoisefruicferr
rt^uit^feiurÂWmmsB^ffH^
loqutmf- ' fictttétxpxtfrquûâ
lûquertfar \*%Mit£cmíertm hütmntfquodiraeU^tnrr nondum uxl*rn.
Kcif->i r o e c e N X D o o D i i s i e *
&
A
^fxttmr.* fXfaimeiOtur. \ά*ογχί<Α%λρ*\<ϊίσ fuzztx >f- Veturlwomtfn
ΛψMTfUmrricur^pftLxtu'-£tfifuAuerx>bn§uA hc< -f- hehrxxoi r pAfck\*f*nrôr
hmur f nmum^tí0éψúfuL·f4ìcfv^fìáoe^^tprΫwftign ." rvSmiimartr
vnmñtt .f4ufirAi«rfijut*ilLA mu^rnjsnrmmfïéù^ê' «****<**»#» *gn¿>
aituf&fucif w ti^uB AbitTTfrwjttiwe-Aig^^ ti t m r n u r . M i m
fALubfrrrmû -tr&nftzum xét¿\>oL· xàxfm * xfktcuL· x¿t\ufr»^ú' fritti«)
pAfcb^qutfclbciine-tian*^
uáxtzxrrwrfrti&rtftwbifltuxn
ftrtrocWtnuncta A ^ w t F « {, ^ j^eWttferranfhxff: Jekocfaiias/mun<fo
rrAdquodÁdfwrrr , € 1 uieraminmundo ' tnfinr«Jtle)C«3r*>f·- «*$fcptftde
beoüiitndc v&Hirxnt adfu uíc&pur <\uoá\imt'tOmuíT^ümfá\\j^ra0mr'^r^
<lftnr·' QttiJ-Mrfwiem mfttrncpm < fmtfmtt*Wif^ff«ajmf^ow« cmrnt
«redènti { ^ t t i e n ^ í f t ^ « é i w r 4 i U « . J i ^
ÇmetrtfWdtttfftseef qeueaknrûdttWw
* ^
4. Laon 80, f. 47v (the scribe's uncial with section numbers, the Nota sign, asterisk
s-like flourish marking scriptural citations)