Chapter VI: Introduction (2)

John's stay at Chartres (1138-1141) made him a permanent advocate of liberal education; but to no avail; the influence of Paris and the rising tide of Aristotelianism gained the day. As a champion of the newly-recovered works of Aristotle (see p. 42) he was more in accord with the tendencies of his time.

The concluding section of the account narrates John's return to Paris, his further studies there (1141-1148), and his visit to his old school on the "Mount":

From hence I was withdrawn by the poverty of my condition, the
request of my companions, and the advice of my friends, that I
should undertake the office of a tutor. I obeyed their wishes;
and on my return [to Paris] after three years, finding Master
Gilbert [de la Porree] I studied Logic and Divinity with him: but
he was very speedly removed from us, and in his place we had
Robert de Poule, a man amiable alike for his rectitude and his
attainments. Then came Simon de Poissy, who was a faithful
reader, but an obtuse disputator. These two were my teachers in
Theology only.

Twelve years having passed away, whilst I was engaged in these
various occupations, I determined to revisit my old companions,
whom I found still engaged with Logic at Mont St. Genevieve, and
to confer with them touching old matters of debate; that we might
by mutual comparison measure together our several progress. I
found them as before, and where they were before; nor did they
appear to have reached the goal in unravelling the old questions,
nor had they added one jot of a proposition. The aims that once
inspired them, inspired them still: they had progressed in one
point only: they had unlearned moderation, they knew not modesty;
in such wise that one might despair of their recovery. And thus
experience taught me a manifest conclusion, that, whereas
dialectic furthers other studies, so if it remain by itself it
lies bloodless and barren, nor does it quicken the soul to yield
fruit of philosophy, except the same conceive from elsewhere.[14]

This was doubtless one of the experiences which led John to vigorous argument on the futility of devotion to Logic alone, and on the importance of a liberal education:

That eloquence is of no effect without wisdom is a saying that is
frequent and true. Whence it is evident that to be of effect it
operates within the limits of wisdom. Therefore eloquence is
effective in proportion to the measure of wisdom which each one
has acquired; for the former does harm if it is dissociated from
the latter.

From this it follows that dialectic, which is the quickest and
most prompt among the hand-maids of eloquence, is of use to each
one in proportion to the measure of his knowledge. For it is of
most use to him who knows the most and of least use to him who
knows little. For as the sword of Hercules in the hand of a pygmy
or dwarf is ineffective, while the same sword in the hand of
Achilles or Hector strikes down everything like a thunderbolt, so
dialectic, if it is deprived of the vigor of the other
disciplines is to a certain degree crippled and almost useless.
If it is vigorous through the might of the others, it is powerful
in destroying all falsehood and, to ascribe the minimum to it,
it is adequate for the proper discussion of all things ...

Now it is very easy for each workman to talk about his own art;
but to do skilfully what the art requires, is most difficult. For
what physician is there who does not talk often and much about
elements, and humors, and complexions, and diseases, and the rest
that pertain to physic? But he who gets well on such talk could
well have afforded to be even sicker. What ethical teacher has
not an abundance of rules for good living so long as they exist
only on his lips? But it is clearly a much harder task to express
them in actual life. Mechanics, individually, talk glibly about
their own arts, but not one of them so lightly vies (in practice)
with the architect or the boxer. It is the same in every other
line. So it is very easy to talk about definition, arguments, or
genus and the like, but to devise these same things within the
limits of a single art for the purpose of performing fully the
functions of the art, is far more difficult [i.e. to discuss
logic in the abstract is easy, but to reason logically in any
specific field of knowledge is difficult]. Therefore he who is
hampered by a dearth of the disciplines will not have the power
which Dialectic promises and affords.[15]

The views of John of Salisbury concerning the study of Aristotle are indicated on pages 42-44.

2. THE NEW METHOD

The new method of study and investigation, developed by Abelard, was a second influence of importance in the growth of universities. The method itself--later known as the scholastic method--is illustrated on pages 20, 58, 121 ff. The present section therefore merely indicates the ways in which it influenced the course of higher education.

(_a_) The new method was one cause of the awakened interest in study and investigation. Its effect is thus described by the most learned historian of mediaeval universities:

Paris and Bologna experienced before all other schools, and
nearly simultaneously, at the beginning of the twelfth century,
an unexpected, almost sudden development. For in these schools
alone a definite branch of learning was treated ... by a new
method, adapted to contemporary needs, but hitherto unknown, or
insufficiently known, to other teachers of the period; and
thereby a new era of scientific investigation was inaugurated.
This new method had an attractive power for teachers and scholars
of various countries ... In this way the cornerstones of
permanent abodes of learning were laid. The continually growing
number of scholars brought with it the increase of teachers; the
desire of both classes for learning was awakened; and this
desire, and the combative exchange of ideas in the
disputations,--which now first became really established in the
schools as a result of the new method,--were effective forces to
keep investigation active, and the schools themselves from
decline.

In Paris, it was the cultivation of Logic, but chiefly the new
method in Theology, ... developed in various ways especially by
Abelard and other teachers, and extended by his contemporaries
and their disciples ... which caused the revolution in the
schools of that city.[16]

(_b_) The new method of Abelard established a new form of exposition, and consequently a new mode of teaching, in Canon Law and in Theology. The earliest university text-book in Canon Law--the "Decretum" of Gratian--adopted this method, with some modifications. It was followed in portions of the chief text-book in Theology,--the "Sentences" of Peter Lombard. Variously modified, it became the method used in all subsequent scholastic philosophy and theology. It was widely used in connection with other university studies. In general, it was to mediaeval education what the method of experiment is to the study and teaching of modern natural science. A good illustration of its recent use is Thomas Harper's "Metaphysic of the School."

(_c_) The scholastic method became the basis of one of the most important university exercises,--the disputation or debate, which was employed in every field of study.[17]

3. THE NEW STUDIES

During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries the intellectual life of western Europe was enriched by the addition of a group of books, old and new, which were destined to influence profoundly the growth of the universities, as well as the whole course of mediaeval life and thought. Without some such addition to the stock of learning higher education could hardly have developed at all, for the materials available for it previous to the twelfth century were decidedly scanty. The books presently to be described furnished a body of advanced and solid instruction, suited to the needs of the times. They formed one of the permanent influences which both developed and maintained centers of higher education, for the new learning was not less potent in attracting students than the fame of individual teachers or the new method of study.

The greater number of the books which formed the body of university instruction were recoveries from the mass of ancient and long-disused Greek and Roman learning, together with a few works of Arabic and Jewish origin. To this group belong the works of Aristotle, the body of Roman Law, and the medical works of Galen, Hippocrates, and various Arabic and Jewish physicians. In the main, these had been hitherto unknown in western Europe, or at least practically for-gotten since the days of the Roman Empire. In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries they were collected and made generally accessible to students. Those not originally written in Latin were now translated into Latin; manuscript copies were multiplied and widely diffused.

But the intellectual activity of the times accomplished much more than the recovery of some fragments of ancient learning; it also created two new fields of study,--Scholastic Philosophy and Theology, and Canon Law,--and produced the text-books which marked them off as distinct and professional studies. The book which established the _method_ of these studies was Abelard's "Yes and No" (see p. 20); but the works which furnished the substance of university instruction were, in Theology, the "Sentences" (Sententiae) of Peter Lombard, and in Canon Law, the "Decree" (Decretum) of Gratian, which was also known as the "Harmony of Contradictory Canons" (Concordia Discordantium Canonum), and additions thereto, indicated on page 56.

Thus, during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the growth of universities was stimulated by the development of a great body of learning hitherto inaccessible or unknown. The striking nature of this development will be clearer if we recall that no addition to the learning of western Europe in the least degree comparable to this had been made during the entire seven centuries preceding.

The books above mentioned did not constitute the sole resources for higher education. Besides the already long-used text-books on the Seven Liberal Arts there were mathematical and philosophical works of Arabic origin, and as the revival progressed many new books were written on the old subjects. But the books already named were fundamentally important as furnishing not only the early intellectual impulse to the growth of universities, but also the main body of studies in the Faculties of Arts, Theology, Law, and Medicine down to the year 1500. Many of them were in use at a much later date, and some--with many revisions--are still standard text-books. No one can understand the intellectual life of the universities who does not have some acquaintance with the titles and contents of these works. It may be added that acquaintance with them is essential also to the understanding of European history and literature. This section is therefore devoted to certain details concerning the early history of university studies.

(a) _The Works of Aristotle_

The works of Aristotle were composed in Athens, 335-322 B.C. Their history, from the time of Aristotle's death to their appearance in Latin translations in western Europe, fifteen hundred years later, cannot be here detailed. The translations commonly used in the universities were nearly all made during the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The earlier ones were made in Spain, from Arabic versions of the original Greek; the later, directly from Greek copies found in Constantinople, and elsewhere in the East. The Arabic-Latin translations were very poor, owing to the two removes from the original Greek and the incapacity of the translators. Those directly from the Greek were somewhat better, yet far from satisfactory; and new versions were repeatedly made down to the end of the fifteenth century. University reforms sometimes included the adoption of these better translations (see p. 48).

The works known by the year 1300 may be classified in four groups:

{1. Categories = {Predicamenta. I. Logical { {Categoriae. treatises {2. On interpretation = {De Interpretatione. commonly { {Peri Hermeneias. referred to {3. Prior Analytics = Analytica Priora. as the Organon {4. Posterior Analytics = Analytica Posteriora. or {5. Topics = Topica. Methodology {6. Sophistical} = Sophisticae Elenchi. { Refutations}

II. Moral {7. Politics.
and Practical {8. Ethics.
Philosophy {9. Rhetoric.
{10. Poetics.
{11. A Physical Discourse (Physics).
{12. On the Heavens.
{13. On Generation and Destruction.
{14. Meteorologies.
{15. Researches about Animals.
{16. On Parts of Animals.
{17. On Locomotion of Animals.
{18. On Generation of Animals.
III. Natural {19. On the Soul.
Philosophy. {20. Appendices to the work "On the Soul."
{ (_a_) On Sense and Sensible Things.
{ (_b_) On Memory and Recollection.
{ (_c_) On Sleep and Waking.
{ (_d_) On Dreams and Prophesying in Sleep.
{ (_e_) On Longevity and Shortlivedness.
{ (_f_) On Youth and Old Age.
{ (_g_) On Life and Death.
{ (_g_) On Respiration.

IV. Rational {21. Metaphysics. Philosophy. {

This encyclopedic collection became accessible in Latin translations only by slow degrees. Abelard knew only the first two (possibly also the third and fourth) works of the Organon. John of Salisbury, in the next generation, was familiar with the six treatises of the Organon, but apparently not with the others. Little seems to have been added to these until the beginning of the thirteenth century, when the Ethics, the Physics, and the Metaphysics were mentioned at Paris,--the last two as forbidden works. The great era of translation seems to have been between 1200 and 1270, when both Arabic-Latin and Greek-Latin versions were made of most of the remaining treatises. The recovery of Aristotle thus occupied more than a century and a half. During that period the intellectual life of western Europe was stimulated by the influx of hitherto unknown works of that philosopher, and weighty additions were made to the list of available studies.

As usual, the world of scholars and the universities were slow to recognize the worth of the new studies. This was due partly to the natural conservatism of teachers, and partly to the fear of ecclesiastical authorities that the study of Aristotle would give rise to heresies. Thus in the documents of the time we meet, on the one hand, vigorous arguments by progressive scholars in favor of Aristotle, and on the other, university regulations prescribing what books shall or shall not be studied.

The attitude of Abelard toward Aristotle has already been cited (see p. 19).

His pupil, John of Salisbury, devotes a considerable portion of the _Metalogicus_ to a discussion of the utility of the various portions of the Organon and to the defense of Aristotle, as is shown by the titles of various chapters of that work. It is important to remember that he is advocating the study of the _newly_ translated books, as well as those already known:

That Logic, because it seeks the truth, takes the lead in all
Philosophy.

On the usefulness of the Categories and their appliances.

What Conception is, and the usefulness of the Periermeniae or
more correctly Periermenia. [Peri Hermeneias. On Interpretation.]

Of what the Body of Art consists; and on the usefulness of the
Topics.

Why Aristotle deserved more than others the name of philosopher.

That Aristotle erred in many ways; that he is eminent in Logic.

John of Salisbury clearly recognized the supremacy of Aristotle among logicians. After naming Apuleius, Cicero, Porphyry, Boethius, Augustine, and others, he adds:

But while individually they shine forth because of their own
merits, they all boast that they worship the very footsteps of
Aristotle; to such a degree, indeed, that by a sure pre-eminence
he has made peculiarly his own the common name of all
philosophers. For by Antonomy [a figure of speech] he is called
The Philosopher _par excellence_.

It is clear, however, that Aristotle had by no means attained, at the middle of the twelfth century, the authoritative position which he held a hundred years later. This appears in the chapter "On those who Carp at the Works of Aristotle":

I cannot sufficiently wonder what sort of a mind they have (if,
that is, they have any) who carp at the works of Aristotle,
which, in any case, I proposed not to expound but to praise.
Master Theodoric, as I recall, ridiculed the Topics,--not of
Aristotle, but of Drogo. Yet he once taught those very Topics.
Certain auditors of Master Robert of Melun calumniated this work
as practically useless. All decried the Categories. Wherefore I
hesitated some time about commending them; but [there was no
question as to] the rest of his works, since they were commended
by the judgment of all; but I did not think that they should be
praised grudgingly. Yet opposition is made to the Elenchi
[Sophistical Refutations], though stupidly, because it contains
poetry; but clearly the idiom of [the Greek] language does not
lend itself readily to translation. In this respect the Analytics
seem to me preferable, because they are no less efficient for
actual use, and because by their easier comprehension they
stimulate eloquence.[18]

The slowness with which these works made their way is described by Roger Bacon at the end of the thirteenth century.

But a part of the philosophy of Aristotle has come slowly into
the use of the Latins. For his Natural Philosophy and
Metaphysics, and the Commentaries of Averrhoes and of others,
were translated in our times, and were excommunicated at Paris
before the year of our Lord 1237 on account of [their heretical
views on] the eternity of matter and of time, and on account of
the [heresies contained in the] book on Interpretation of Dreams
(which is the third book on Sleep and Wakefulness), and on
account of the many errors in the translation. The Logicalia were
also slowly received and read, for the blessed Edmund, Archbishop
of Canterbury, was the first at Oxford, in my time, to lecture on
the book of Elenchi [Sophistical Refutations] and I saw Master
Hugo who at first read the book of Posterior Analytics, and I saw
his opinion. So there were few [books] which were considered
worth [reading] in the aforesaid philosophy of Aristotle,
considering the multitudes of Latins; nay, exceedingly few and
almost none, up to this year of our Lord 1292. So, too, the
Ethics of Aristotle has been tardily tried and has lately been
read by Masters, though only here and there. And the entire
remaining philosophy of Aristotle in a thousand volumes, in which
he treated all the knowledges, has never yet been translated and
made known to the Latins.[19]

The last sentence of the account displays an ignorance of the number of Aristotle's extant writings which was doubtless shared by all of Bacon's contemporaries. Earlier writers, beginning with Andronicus of Rhodes (first century B.C.), had also placed the number at one thousand; Bacon probably copied the statement from one of these.

The attitude of ecclesiastical authorities toward the study of Aristotle at Paris is expressed in a series of regulations extending over nearly half a century (1210-1254). They indicate at first a fear of certain of the newly translated books on account of their heretical views, as is stated by Roger Bacon (p. 44). This suspicion gradually disappears; and by 1254 all the more important works of Aristotle are not only approved, but prescribed for study.

In 1210 a church council held at Paris sentenced certain heretics to be burned, condemned various theological writings, and added:

Nor shall the books of Aristotle on Natural Philosophy, and the
Commentaries [of Averrhoes on Aristotle] be read in Paris in
public or in secret; and this we enjoin under pain of
excommunication.[20]

In 1215 the statutes of the Papal Legate, Robert de Courcon, for the University, prescribe in detail what shall, and what shall not, be studied:

The treatises of Aristotle on Logic, both the Old and the New,
are to be read in the schools in the regular and not in the
extraordinary courses. On feast-days [holidays] nothing is to be
read except ... the Ethics, if one so chooses, and the fourth
book of the Topics. The books of Aristotle on Metaphysics or
Natural Philosophy, or the abridgments of these works, are not to
be read.[21]

In other words, the Old and New Logic are prescribed studies; the Ethics, and Topics, Bk. IV, are optional; the Metaphysics and the Natural Philosophy are forbidden.

Sixteen years later (1231) the Statutes of Pope Gregory IX for the University prohibit only the Natural Philosophy, and even these works only until they are "purged from error":

Furthermore, we command that the Masters of Arts ... shall not
use in Paris those books on Natural Philosophy which for a
definite reason were prohibited in the provincial council [of
1210], until they have been examined and purged from every
suspicion of error.[22]

The final triumph of Aristotle in the University is indicated by the statute of the Masters of Arts in 1254.[23] It must have had at least the tacit approval of the pope or his delegate. The statute is too long to quote effectively to the point. None of the works are forbidden, and a large number are prescribed. The list of works mentioned includes--

(1) The six logical treatises of the Organon; (2) Ethics, Bks. I-IV; (3) Physics, On the Heavens and the Earth, Meteorologics, On Generation, On Animals, On the Soul, On Sense and Sensible Things, On Sleep and Waking, On Memory and Recollection, On Life and Death; (4) Metaphysics. To these are added two other works then believed to be Aristotle's,--On Plants, and On Causes,--and numerous books by other authors (named on p. 137) which do not concern the present discussion. A comparison of the list above with the list on page 40 will show that nearly the whole range of Aristotle's works is prescribed. Comparison with the statute of 1215 will show not only a change of view regarding the works then forbidden, but also an immense broadening of the studies of the Faculty of Arts in the course of forty years.

The foregoing details are cited to give an idea of the first stage of the question of Aristotle in the universities. The statute of 1254 may be taken as closing the long struggle for the recognition of his works. The broad principle of their general acceptance had been established; thenceforward for nearly three centuries they remained the dominant studies of the Faculties of Arts everywhere.

These centuries include the second period of their academic history. Their authority is now hardly questioned; and woe to the questioner! They furnish the basis for the great structure of scholastic philosophy; they are reconciled with Christian doctrine. Aristotle is thenceforward "The Philosopher"--he is so styled even in modern scholastic philosophy; he is "the forerunner of Christ in things natural," "the master of those who know." In this period, then, academic debate concerned itself with matters of detail. What portions of his works should be studied for the various degrees in Arts? In what order should they be studied? What comments should be read? What translations should be used? So late as 1519 these are the chief questions considered in the reformed plan of studies in Arts at Leipzig. The reader will note the stress laid upon the study of the text itself; the exclusion of frivolous comments, and the use of the latest translations by Greek scholars.

Inasmuch as no good thing is more desirable than philosophy, as
Cicero says, and none more advantageous has been given to the
race of mortals, or granted by heaven, or will ever be given as a
gift; in order that we may possess this too, we choose as our
guide Aristotle, whom we cause to be commended for his knowledge
of facts, the number of his works, his ability in speaking, and
the acumen of his intellectual powers. Nor will we interpret the
visions and involved questions of his interpreters, since it is
characteristic of a very poor intellect to grow wise from
commentaries only, in which, neglecting Aristotle's meaning, the
Sophists dispute about empty trifles. But his works, translated
in part by Archeropylus [Argyropulos], in part by Augustus Nipho
and Hermolaus Barbarus and Theodoras Gaza, will be made clear in
the order outlined below:[24] [Then follows the list of books,
for which see p. 134].

The third stage of the debate concerning Aristotle began shortly after 1500. His works were less exclusively the subject of study: they were being displaced by the Latin and Greek classics. They were, moreover, the object of repeated attack. In 1536, in the University of Paris, which had so long maintained their study, Pierre Ramus successfully defended the startling thesis, "Everything that Aristotle taught is false." This was only one sign of their loss of prestige. New and improved text-books in Logic absorbed the useful portions of the Organon; the authority of the Natural Philosophy waned with the rise of experimental science; that of the Metaphysics yielded to the new philosophy of Descartes. By the end of the seventeenth century they ceased to be a potent factor in university studies.

(b) _The Roman Law_

The great compilation of the Roman Law known as the _Corpus Juris Civilis_ (Body of Civil Law) constitutes a second important addition of the twelfth century to the field of university studies. It was probably more important as an influence upon the growth of universities than the works of Aristotle.

The greater part of the Corpus Juris was compiled at Constantinople, 529-533 A.D., by certain eminent jurists under the Roman Emperor, Justinian. The purpose of the work was to reduce to order and harmony the mass of confused and contradictory statutes and legal opinions, and to furnish a standard body of laws of manageable size in place of the unwieldly mass of incorrect texts commonly in use, so that "the entire ancient law, in a state of confusion for some fourteen hundred years and now by us made clear, may be, so to speak, enclosed within a wall and have nothing left outside it." The jurists entrusted with this work were also required to prepare an introductory book for students, as described below. After the completion of the whole work Justinian issued (533-565) many new statutes (Novellae) which were never officially collected, but which came to be considered a part of the Corpus Juris. The main divisions of the Body of Civil Law are--

(1) The Code, in twelve books, which contains statutes of the Emperors from the third century A.D.

Since [says Justinian] we find the whole course of our statutes
... to be in a state of such confusion that they reach to an
infinite length and surpass the bounds of all human capacity, it
was therefore our first desire to make a beginning with the most
sacred Emperors of old times, to amend their statutes, and to put
them in a clear order, so that they might be collected together
in one book, and, being divested of all superfluous repetition
and most inequitable disagreement, might afford to all mankind
the ready resource of their unalloyed character.[25]

(2) The Digest, or Pandects, in fifty books, containing extracts from the opinions of Roman lawyers on a great variety of legal questions. This work was also undertaken to bring order and harmony out of the prevailing confusion:

We have entrusted the entire task to Tribonianus, a most
distinguished man, Master of the Offices, ex-quaestor of our
sacred palace, and ex-consul, and we have laid on him the whole
service of the enterprise described, so that with other
illustrious and learned colleagues he might fulfil our desire.
[He is] to collect together and to submit to certain
modifications the very most important works of old times,
thoroughly intermixed and broken up as they may almost be called.
But in the midst of our careful researches, it was intimated to
us by the said exalted person that there were nearly two thousand
books written by the old lawyers, and more than three million
lines were left us by them, all of which it was requisite to read
and carefully consider and out of them to select whatever might
be best. [This was accomplished] so that everything of great
importance was collected into fifty books, and all ambiguities
were settled, without any refractory passage being left.[26]

In mediaeval university documents the Digest is frequently mentioned in three divisions, which probably indicate three separate instalments in which the MS. of the work was brought to Bologna in the eleventh and twelfth centuries: the Old Digest (Digestum Vetus) Bks. I-XXIV, title ii, Infortiatum Bks. XXIV, title iii-XXXVIII, title iii, and New Digest (Digestum Novum) Bks. XXXVIII, title iv-L. The meaning of the term Infortiatum is uncertain.

This distinction between the various parts of the Digest is
purely arbitrary.... The division must have originated in an
accidental separation of some archetypal MS.[27]

(3) The Institutes, in four books, an elementary text-book for students. The purpose of the book was to afford a simple, clear, and trustworthy introduction to the study of law, and to economize the student's time:

When we had arranged and brought into perfect harmony the
hitherto confused mass of imperial constitutions (i.e. the Code),
we then extended our care to the vast volumes of ancient law;
and, sailing as it were across the mid ocean, have now completed,
through the favour of heaven, a work that once seemed beyond hope
(i.e. the Digest).

When by the blessing of God this task was accomplished, we
summoned the most eminent Tribonian, master and ex-quaestor of
our palace, together with the illustrious Theophilus and
Dorotheus, professors of law, all of whom have on many occasions
proved to us their ability, legal knowledge, and obedience to our
orders; and we have specially charged them to compose, under our
authority and advice, Institutes, so that you may no more learn
the first elements of law from old and erroneous sources, but
apprehend them by the clear light of imperial wisdom; and that
your minds and ears may receive nothing that is useless or
misplaced, but only what obtains in actual practice. So that,
whereas, formerly, the junior students could scarcely, after
three years' study, read the imperial constitutions, you may now
commence your studies by reading them, you who have been thought
worthy of an honour and a happiness so great that the first and
last lessons in the knowledge of the law should issue for you
from the mouth of the emperor.

When, therefore, by the assistance of the same eminent person
Tribonian and that of other illustrious and learned men, we had
compiled the fifty books, called Digests or Pandects, in which is
collected the whole ancient law, we directed that these
Institutes should be divided into four books, which might serve
as the first elements of the whole science of law.

In these books a brief exposition is given of the ancient laws,
and of those also, which, overshadowed by disuse, have been again
brought to light by our imperial authority.

These four books of Institutes thus compiled, from all the
Institutes left us by the ancients, and chiefly from the
commentaries of our Gaius, both in his Institutes and in his work
on daily affairs, and also from many other commentaries, were
presented to us by the three learned men we have above named. We
have read and examined them and have accorded to them all the
force of our constitutions.

Receive, therefore, with eagerness, and study with cheerful
diligence, these our laws, and show yourselves persons of such
learning that you may conceive the flattering hope of yourselves
being able, when your course of legal study is completed, to
govern our empire in the different portions that may be entrusted
to your care.

Given at Constantinople on the eleventh day of the calends of
December, in the third consulate of the Emperor Justinian, ever
August (533)[28]

(4) The Novellae (Novels), or new statutes issued by Justinian between the final edition of the Code and his death (534-565). These are really a continuation of the Code, but they were never officially collected.

The Code and the Institutes were known and studied in Italy throughout the Dark Ages, but the Digest, much the largest and most important part of the Corpus Juris, was almost wholly neglected, if not unknown, until the time of Irnerius of Bologna (_c._ 1070-1130). He and his co-laborers collected and arranged the scattered parts of the entire Body of Civil Law, and in particular introduced the Digest to western Europe. "Without the Digest the study of Roman Law was in a worse position than the study of Aristotle when he was known only from the Organon." In a most important sense, therefore, the recovery of the Corpus Juris was a contribution of the twelfth century to the group of available higher studies. Hitherto Law had been taught usually as a mere branch of Rhetoric, and as a part of a liberal education. The body of material now made available was sufficient to occupy the student's entire time for several years. It therefore attained standing as an independent subject, and as a distinctly professional study.

The effect of this newly recovered body of learning upon the rise of universities was very much like that of Abelard and his new method. Students flocked in thousands to study law at Bologna, and toward the close of the twelfth century the University was organized. Numerous other universities arose directly from the same impulse, and "Law was the leading Faculty in by far the greater number of mediaeval universities" (Rashdall). Except for Canon Law, the Corpus Juris Civilis remained the chief study of the Faculties of Law for more than five centuries. Roman Law is still very generally taught in European universities. Thus the impulse given by Irnerius and his co-laborers is influential in university affairs of to-day.

The influence of Roman Law upon the social and political history of Europe is far-reaching. The subject is beyond the limits of the present work; but it is to be noted that this influence was exerted as a result of its study in the universities (see Rashdall, Vol. II, Pt. II, pp. 708-709).

Rashdall and Denifle think that the example of Justinian inspired the first mediaeval grant of special privileges to scholars (see p. 82). If this is true, the Roman Law had a most important effect upon the history of universities themselves. Two important mediaeval privileges for masters and scholars were exemption from taxation and the right of trial before special courts. Whether or not these were copied from the Roman Law is a question; but the Code of Justinian, following the statutes of earlier emperors, explicitly grants both of these privileges to teachers. These are so often mentioned that it is worth while to present those bearing on the subject:

THE EMPERORS LEO AND ZENO, AUGUSTI, TO EUSEBIUS, MASTER OF
OFFICES.

By this law we decree that those who serve in the individual
schools, and who, after completing the curricula of their duties,
shall have reached the rank of chiefs and through the adored
purple of our divinity have won the dignity of most illustrious
Counts, shall enjoy both the girdle and all the privileges open
to them, and hereafter to their life's end shall be subject to
the court of Your Highness only, nor shall they be compelled by
the command of any one else whomsoever to undergo civil
litigation.

Yet in criminal suits and in matters connected with public
tribute we wish the appropriate jurisdiction of the rulers of the
provinces to be recognized against even such men, lest, under the
pretext of a granted privilege, either the influence of the
wicked be increased or the public good be diminished.[29]

THE EMPEROR CONSTANTINE, AUGUSTUS, TO THE PEOPLE.

We direct that physicians, and chiefly imperial physicians, and
ex-imperial physicians, grammarians and other professors of
letters, together with their wives and sons, and whatever
property they possess in their own cities, be immune from all
payment of taxes and from all civil or public duties, and that in
the provinces they shall not have strangers quartered on them, or
perform any official duties, or be brought into court, or be
subject to legal process, or suffer injustice; and if any one
harass them he shall be punished at the discretion of the Judge.
We also command that their salaries and fees be paid, so that
they may more readily instruct many in liberal studies and the
above mentioned Arts.

Proclaimed on the fifth day before the Kalends of October (Sept.
27) at Constantinople, in the Consulship of Dalmatius and
Zenophilas.[30]

(c) _Canon Law_

About 1142 (the year of Abelard's death) Gratian, a monk of Bologna, doubtless influenced by the school of Roman Law in that city, made a compilation of the Canon Law, which included the canons or rules governing the Church in its manifold activities,--"its relations with the secular power, its own internal administration, or the conduct of its members." Hitherto Canon Law had been regarded as merely a subdivision of Theology, just as Roman Law had been considered a branch of Rhetoric. It now became an independent subject,--further addition to the body of higher studies. As an influence upon the development of universities it was not less important than the _Corpus Juris Civilis_.

The compilation made by Gratian was added to in later generations, and the whole body of church law was known in the fifteenth century as the _Corpus Juris Canonici_ (Body of Canon Law). Its main divisions are:

1. The Decree of Gratian _(Decretum Gratiani)_ in three parts,
published c. 1142. Part I contains one hundred and one
distinctions (_distinctiones_) or divisions, which treat of
matters relating to ecclesiastical persons and offices. Dist.
XXXVII is translated below. Part II contains thirty-six cases
(_causae_) each of which is divided into questions
(_quaestiones_). These questions deal with problems which may
arise in the administration of the canon law. Part III contains
five distinctions which deal with the ritual and the sacraments
of the church. Under each distinction, or question, are arranged
the canons--the views of ecclesiastical authorities--on the
matter under discussion.

2. The Decretals (_Decretales_), in five books, published by Pope
Gregory IX in 1234.

3. The Sixth Book (_Liber Sextus_), a supplement to the Decretals
by Pope Boniface VIII, 1298.

4. The Constitutions of Clementine (_Constitutiones
Clementinae_), 1317.

5. Several collections of papal laws not included in those above,
known by the general title of _Extravagantes_, i.e., laws _extra
vagantes_, or outside of, the four compilations just mentioned.

Among all these the _Decretum_ of Gratian was the great innovation which first marked out Canon Law as a distinct field of learning, separate from both Theology and Roman Law. It was written as a text-book; "it was one of those great text-books which take the world by storm." It created an entirely new class of students, separate from those devoted to Arts, Theology, Roman Law, and Medicine,--just as the development of Engineering and other new professional studies have created new groups of university students to-day,--and thereby increased the resort to the universities.

The selection following illustrates numerous characteristics of mediaeval university study. (1) The question itself is a very ancient subject of debate; the controversy, on religious grounds, concerning the study of the classics, had already continued for nearly a thousand years, and was destined to continue for centuries after the appearance of the _Decretum_. Many such questions were debated in the universities for generations. The debate on the classics still rages, though the arguments pro and con no longer raise the point of their influence on religious belief. (2) The selection is one among many examples of the powerful influence of Abelard's method in mediaeval writing and teaching. The reader will at once see in it the form of the "Yes and No." (3) It gives a very good idea of the substance of a university lecture, which would ordinarily consist in reading the actual text and comments here set down (see p. 111). (4) It shows how the mass of comments came to overshadow the original text, and by consequence to absorb the greater part of the attention of teachers and students. One object of university reform in all studies at the end of the fifteenth and the beginning of the sixteenth century was to sweep away this burdensome and often useless material, and to return to the study of the text itself (see p. 48). (5) It illustrates a common mode of interpreting in a figurative sense passages from the Bible which to the modern reader seem to have no figurative meaning. Thus (pp. 64, 66) the plagues of frogs and flies which Moses brought upon Egypt typify "the empty garrulousness of dialecticians, and their sophistical arguments "; the gifts of the three Magi to the infant Jesus signify "the three parts of philosophy," etc. Mediaeval literature contains a great mass of such interpretations.

The text and the "gloss," or commentary, are here placed on opposing pages for the sake of clearness. The text is a compilation, chiefly from earlier compilations; Gratian did not as a rule consult the sources themselves. His pupil, Paucapalea, made many additions to the text, one of which appears in this selection. The gloss here translated is the standard commentary (_glossa ordinaria_) which was used for centuries in the regular university lectures (see p. 108). Like the text, it is a compilation from many sources. It was first made (c. 1212) by John the German (Joannes Teutonicus), who added his own notes--usually signed "John"--to his selections from earlier glossators. The names or titles, often abbreviated, of commentators whom he quotes are frequently appended to their notes, e.g. John of Fa[enza], Hugo [of Pisa], C[ardinalis], Lau[rentius Hispanus]; many notes are unsigned. About 1238 the compilation of John the German was revised and enlarged by Bartholomew of Brescia, who also added comments from other writers, e.g. Arc [hidiaconus]. This revision forms the greater part, if not the whole, of the gloss which appears below.

The cross-references, in the comments below, are left untranslated. They are mainly citations of other passages in the _Decretum_ itself. Such references as XVI. quaest III. nemo are to be read, Case XVI, question III, in the section beginning _Nemo_; XLVIII dist. sit rector means Distinction XLVIII, in the section beginning _Sit rector_. Several of the references in this selection are incorrect.

The gloss on this page belongs to the first line of text on page 60. It forms, with the Summaries on later pages, a complete analysis of the text. It indicates, first, the five subdivisions of the _distinctio_; second, its general purport. Later summaries analyze small portions of the text. (Cf. the description of the lecture by Odofredus, p. 111.)

This division is divided into five sections; the second begins: "Then why ..." (p. 68); the third begins: "The report has come to as" (p. 74); the fourth begins: "Christians are forbidden" (p. 75); the fifth begins: "As therefore is evident" (p. 75). John of Fa.[A]

Summary. Here follows the thirty-seventh division in which the question is asked whether it is fitting that the clergy be made acquainted with profane literature, that is, the books of the heathen. And first he proves that they should not be read (as far as "But on the other hand," p. 64). Then he proves the opposite and afterwards gives the solution (to "Then why," p. 68). The first two chapters are plain.

[SHALL PRIESTS BE ACQUAINTED WITH PROFANE LITERATURE, OR NO?]

=But the question (_h_) is asked whether these men should be made
acquainted with profane literature.=

Here is what is written upon the matter in the fourth
Carthaginian Council:

=A Bishop should not read the books of the (_i_) heathen.=

A bishop should not read the books of the heathen: those of
heretics he may read carefully, either of necessity (_k_) or for
some special reason.

So Jerome to Pope Damasus on the prodigal son:

=Priests are blameworthy who, to the neglect of the Gospels, read
comedies.=

We see priests of God, to the neglect of the Gospels and the
Prophets, reading comedies, singing the Amatory words of bucolic
verses, keeping Vergil in their hands, and making that which
occurs with boys as a necessity (_k_) ground for accusation
against themselves because they do it for pleasure.

Idem:

=They walk in the vanity and darkness of the senses who occupy
themselves with profane learning.[B]=

Does he not seem to you to be walking in the vanity of the
senses, and in darkness of mind, who day and night torments
himself with the dialectic art; who, as an investigator of
nature, raises his eyes athwart the heavens and, beyond the
depths of lands and the abyss, is plunged into the so-called
void; who grows warm over iambics, who, in his over zealous mind,
analyses and combines the great jungle of metres; and, (to pass
to another phase of the matter), who seeks riches by fair means
and foul means, who fawns upon kings, grasps at the inheritances
of others, and amasses wealth though he knows not at the time to
whom he is going to leave it?

(_h_) In this thirty-seventh division Gratian asks[C] whether one who is to be ordained ought to be acquainted with profane literature. First, however, he shows that the clergy ought not to give attention to the books of the heathen.[D] Then he gives the argument on the other side and offers this solution, that some read the books of the heathen for amusement and pleasure, and this is forbidden, while some read for instruction, and this is lawful, in order that, through these books they may know how to speak correctly and to distinguish the true from the false. John, as far as "Then why" (p. 68). And notice that in all the chapters up to "But on the other hand" (p. 64) pleasure alone seems to be forbidden.

(_i_) Therefore they ought not to hear the laws, for it is a disgrace to them if they wish to be versed in forensic training. C. de testa consulta divalia. But, on the other hand, the laws are divinely promulgated through the mouths of princes as XVI. quaest. III, nemo.[E] Some say that it is lawful to hear the laws in order that through them the canons may be better understood. He argues in favor of this division in the section beginning "Some read profane literature" (p. 70). John.

(_k_) In order that they may know how to speak correctly.

Likewise [Jerome] on Isaiah:

He who misunderstands the sacred scriptures, or makes a wrong use
of profane wisdom, is drunken with wine[F] and with strong drink.

They are drunken with wine who (_l_) misunderstand the sacred
scriptures and pervert them, and through strong drink they make a
wrong use of profane wisdom and the wiles of the dialecticians,
which are to be called, not so much wiles as figures, that is,
symbols, so-called, and images, which quickly pass away and are
destroyed. Likewise, in accordance with tropology (_m_), we ought
to regard as false prophets those who interpret the words of the
scriptures otherwise than as the Holy Spirit utters them, and as
divine those who from the inferences of their own minds and apart
from the authority of divine words, proclaim as true the
uncertain events of the future. Likewise, those who do not
understand the Scriptures according to the actual truth eat sour
grapes.

Likewise [Jerome] in the Epistle to the Ephesians:

Bishops are blamed who train their own sons in profane
literature.[G]

Let those bishops and priests read [this] who train their own
sons in profane literature, and have them read those well-known
comedies and sing the base writings of the actors of farces,
having educated them perhaps on the money of the church.(_a_) And
that which a virgin, or a widow, or any poor person whatever had
offered, pouring out her whole substance as an offering for sin,
this [is devoted] to a gift (_b_) of the calendar, and a
saturnalian offering, (_c_) and, on the part of the grammarian
and orator, to a thank-offering to Minerva, or else it is turned
over for domestic expenses, or as a temple donation, or for base
gain. Eli, the priest, was himself holy, but because ...

(_l_) The ears of those who misunderstand the words of the Master should be cut off: as XXIV. quaest. I. si Petrus.[H]

(_m_) That is, in accordance with the moral[I] meaning, from trope, i.e. a turning[J] or application, when we apply our words to the shaping of character.

XLIII. distinct. sit rector.

Additio. They did the opposite and he writes of penitence, distinct. I. super tribus. Archi.

(_a_) He argues contrariwise in dist. XXXI. omnino.

(_b_) Strena,--the first gift which is given at the beginning of the Calendar[K]. It is given for a good omen. XXV. quaest. ulti. non observetis.

It is called Strena as if from sine threna, i.e. without lamentation.

(_c_) Sportula (a gift) which is given for fables of Saturn, or for celebrating the festival of Saturn, or for games of Saturn,--for good luck.

...he trained not his sons (_d_) in every form of improving
discipline, he fell prostrate and died.

(Also from the replies of Pope Urban to Charles, Chapt. 48).

Palea [Paucapalea, a pupil of Gratian]:

Heretics, when disputing,[L] place the whole strength of their
wits upon the dialectic art, which, in the judgment of
philosophers, is defined as having the power not of aiding but of
destroying study. But the dialectic art was not pleasing[M] to
God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, for the Kingdom of God is
in the simplicity of faith, not in contentious speech.

Also Rabanus on the Afflictions of the Church:

The blessed Jerome is beaten by an angel because he was reading
the works of Cicero.

We read about the blessed Jerome that when he was reading the
works (_e_) of Cicero he was chidden by an angel because, being a
Christian man, he was devoting himself to the productions of the
pagans.

[The discussion which follows, to "Hence Bede," etc., p. 66, is
attributed, in modern editions, to Gratian.]

Hence, too, the prodigal son in the Gospel is blamed because he
would fain have filled his belly with the husks (_f_) which the
swine did eat.

Hence, too, Origen understands by the flies and frogs with which
the Egyptians were smitten, the empty garrulousness of the
dialecticians and their sophistical arguments.

From all which instances it is gathered that knowledge of profane
literature is not to be sought after by churchmen.

But, on the other hand[N] one reads that Moses and Daniel were
learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians and Chaldeans.

One reads also that God ordered the sons of Israel to spoil (_g_)
the Egyptians of their gold and silver; the moral interpretation
of this teaches that should we find in the poets either the gold
of wisdom or the silver of eloquence, we should turn it to the
profit of useful learning. In Leviticus also we are ordered to
...

(_d_) Such a one is rejected by the evidence, as VI. quaest. I. qui crimen. Also, he cannot be a bishop. As XLVIII. dist. Sec. necesse. Nay he is called a dog rather than a bishop. As II. quaest. VII. qui nee. John.

(_e_) Because he read them for pleasure not for instruction, as de conse. dist. V. non mediocriter.

(_f_) That is, with profane wisdom which fills but does not satisfy,[O]

(_g_) XIIII. quaest V. dixit.[P]

...offer up to God the first fruits of honey, that is, the
sweetness of human eloquence. The Magi, too, offered three gifts,
by which some would have us understand the three parts _(h)_ of
philosophy.

[The reader will note that the two paragraphs following belong
more properly to the first part of the argument; they may be
inserted just before the third paragraph above,--"From all which
instances," etc.]

Finally in his exposition of the Psalms, Cassiodorus bears
witness that all the splendor of rhetorical eloquence, all the
melody of poetic speech, whatever variety there may be of
pleasing pronunciation, have their origin in divine Scriptures.

Hence also Ambrose says concerning the Epistle to the Colossians:
The sum total of celestial knowledge or of earthly creation is in
Him who is their Fountain-head and Author, so that he who knows
Him should not seek anything beyond, because He is goodness and
wisdom in their completeness; whatever is sought elsewhere, in
Him is found in its completeness. In Daniel and Solomon he shows
that He is for infidels the source of all their eloquence and
wisdom. Infidels do not so think, because they do not, in the
Gospels and the prophets, read about astrology and other such
like things, which are of slight _(i)_ worth because they avail
not for salvation, but lead to error; and whoever devotes himself
to these has no care for his soul; while he who knows Christ
finds a treasure house of wisdom and knowledge, because he knows
that which is of avail.

Hence Bede says in the Book of Kings:

=The clergy should not be prevented from reading profane
literature.[Q]=

He harms the mental acumen of readers, and causes it to wane, who
thinks that they should in every way be prevented from reading
profane books; for whatever useful things _(k)_ are found in them
it is lawful to adopt as one's own. Otherwise Moses and Daniel
would not have been allowed to become learned in the wisdom and
literature of the Egyptians and ...

(_h_) I.e. Ethics, natural philosophy, rational philosophy.

(_i_) Compared with other knowledge. John.

(_k_) He argues that the useful is not vitiated by the useless as XVII.
q. IV. questi s. dist. IX. si ad scripturas. Contra Joan.