No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 July 2016
For the Methode of a Poet historical is not such, as of an Historiographer. For an Historiographer discourseth of affayres orderly as they were donne … but a Poet thrusteth into the middest, euen where it most concerneth him, and there recoursing to the thinges forepaste, and diuining of thinges to come, maketh a pleasing Analysis of all.
Spenser, The Faerie Queene
Letter of the Authors.
In his account of twelfth-century ‘cosmologists,’ Winthrop Wetherbee has pointed to an essential problem in the interpretation of Alan of Lille's Anticlaudianus (1182–1183). He argues that the major theme of the poem is ‘the working out of the relation of the Arts to Theology that culminates in Prudentia's vision of God’; given this, Wetherbee argues that there is ‘something gratuitous and anticlimactic about the ensuing psychomachia and the new earthly order to which it leads,’ especially when the ‘virtues associated with the New Man are largely secular.’ The conclusion to which these observations lead is ineluctable: ‘Whatever its significance, the idealism of the “triumph of Nature,” as Alan calls it, is difficult to reconcile with the radical subordination of earthly knowledge in the central books of the poem.’
1 Wetherbee, W., ‘Philosophy, Cosmology, and the Twelfth-Century Renaissance,’ HTCWP 21–53 at 52. See also Wetherbee, W., Platonism and Poetry in the Twelfth Century: The Literary Influence of the School of Chartres (Princeton NJ 1972) 217: ‘But once the transformation [of human perception in heaven] has taken place these later events are wholly redundant. The real resolution of Alain's theme, in the De planctu and in the Anticlaudianus, takes place in heaven…. The recovery of “erectness,” of the dignity of the imago dei, and the psychological integration to which it testifies are the necessary climax of the allegory, and the “Iliad” of the final books is a concession to artistic pretentions which almost betray Alain's sure religious instinct.’ Wetherbee's lucid accounts of the problem formulate a view commonly found in discussion of the poem. See Ochsenbein, P., Studien zum Anticlaudianus des Alanus ab Insulis (Bern-Frankfurt 1975) n. 52 below. Lewis, C. S. says the same thing: ‘I do not say that he has effected a real reconciliation between the two ideals of the Middle Ages. The rift went deeper than he thought. He assumes, rather than makes, a peace.’ Lewis, C. S., The Allegory of Love: A Study in Medieval Tradition (Oxford 1936; rpt. 1972) 105.Google Scholar
I should like to thank Dr. Sarah Kay and Professor Jill Mann, both of Girton College, Cambridge, for their readings of this article. The following abbreviations will be employed:
AHDL: Archives d'histoire doctrinale et littéraire du moyen âge
BGPTM: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des Mittelalters (Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie des Mittelalters in the case of fascicules before 1930)
HTCWP: A History of Twelfth-Century Western Philosophy (ed. Dronke P.; Cambridge 1988)
2 For the range of critical opinion on the matter of the real hero of the poem, Fronesis or the novus homo, see n. 50 below.Google Scholar
3 For the range of critical opinion as to who is signified by the New Man, see discussion in Wilks, M., ‘Alan of Lille and the New Man,’ Studies in Church History 14 (1977) 137–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4 Alain de Lille, Anticlaudianus (ed. Bossuat, R.; Paris 1955) 56. The prose Prologue is missing from the oldest manuscripts (ibid. 24); M. -R. Jung, Études sur le poéme allégorique en France au moyen âge (Bern 1971) 73, argues that the prose Prologue was added by Alan later, in response to attacks on his poem.Google Scholar
5 Liber in distinctionibus dictionum theologicalium, PL 210.685–1012 at 796.Google Scholar
6 Elucidatio in cantica canticorum, PL 210.29–110 at 102.Google Scholar
7 Radulphus de Longo Campo, ‘In Anticlaudianum Alani Commentum’ (ed. Sulowski, J.; Wrocław 1972) 20. Ralph's commentary was completed before 1212–1213. See Meier, C., ‘Die Rezeption des Anticlaudianus Alans von Lille in Textkommentierung und Illustration,’ in Text und Bild: Aspekte des Zusammenwirkens zweier Künste im Mittelalter und früher Neuzeit (ed. Meier, C. and Ruberg, U.; Wiesbaden 1980) 408–548 for the fullest conspectus yet of the commentaries and illustrations of the Anticlaudianus. Google Scholar
8 Despite his discussion of the term theophania (Sulowski, Radulphus de Longo Campo [n. 7 above] 22–24), Ralph does not use this concept in his analysis of the poem.Google Scholar
9 Ralph's treatment of the poem as a mini-encyclopaedia is repeated in some modern discussions of the Anticlaudianus. This is true of Trout, J. M., The Voyage of Prudentia: The World View of Alan of Lille (Washington DC 1979). Similar characterizations of the poem can be found in Raynaud, G. de Lage, Alain de Lille, poéte du xiie siècle (Paris 1951) 52, and Bossuat, Alain de Lille, Anticlaudianus (n. 4 above) 14. See Ochsenbein, , Studien (n. 1 above) 75–77 for convincing arguments that the poem is not intended as an encyclopaedia.Google Scholar
10 PL.210.796.Google Scholar
11 Ibid. Google Scholar
12 In, for example, the address to Nature in the De planctu Naturae, Alan plays with different senses of forma in this way:Google Scholar
Que, Noys puras recolens ideas,
Singulas rerum species monetas,
Rem togans forma, chlamidemque forme
Pollice formans.
De planctu naturae, ed. N. M. Häring, Studi Medievali ser. 3, 19 (1978) 797–879 (VII metre 4). See Ziolkowski J., Alan of Lille's Grammar of Sex: The Meaning of Grammar to a Twelfth-Century Intellectual (Speculum Anniversary Monographs 10; Cambridge MA 1985) 28, for discussion of Alan's use of the word forma.
13 This division of the poem, into a cognitive and an ethical part, was first explicated by Brinkmann, H., ‘Wege der epischen Dichtung im Mittelalter,’ Archiv für das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen 200 (1964) 401–35 at 425. Ochsenbein, Studien (n. 1 above) refutes it (70–72), arguing, first, that Alan nowhere indicates such a division explicitly, and, second, that the division is not so clear in any case: Fronesis‘s journey presupposes ethical achievement, just as the ethical section of the poem involves theoretical arts (the gifts of Fronesis). Ochsenbein's resistance to this division is difficult to understand, since the commentary of his own book is divided into a section dealing with the theoretical progress of Fronesis (78–114) and a section dealing with the virtues and vices (137–185). Of course he deals with other subjects, but these two discussions do cover the narrative of the poem, basically in the disposition suggested by Brinkman. It is true that Alan nowhere mentions the Aristotelian division of the sciences, but the division of philosophy into a speculative and a practical part is a commonplace of twelfth-century divisions of the sciences. Ochsenbein's only strong point, that the theoretical part of the poem contains practical elements, and vice-versa, will be answered in Section V of the present article.Google Scholar
14 For the sake of consistency, throughout this article I shall use the name Fronesis for the figure whom Alan calls indifferently Fronesis and Prudentia. Google Scholar
15 See Green, R. H., ‘Alan of Lille's Anticlaudianus: Ascensus Mentis ad Deum,’ Annuale Medievale 8 (1967) 3–16 at 10 for an argument that Nature is shown to be presumptuous in attempting to form a perfect man by herself. I disagree—Nature's attempt implies the natural desire for divine understanding of the soul's origins, as will be argued below.Google Scholar
16 For the Aristotelian division of the sciences, see Mari, J.étan, Le Problème de la classification des sciences d'Aristote à saint Thomas (Paris 1901); Baur, L., ‘Die philosophische Einteilungsliteratur bis zum Ende der Scholastik,’ BGPTM 4 (1903) 316–97; and Taylor, J., trans., The Didascalicon of Hugh of St. Victor (New York 1961) 161–62.Google Scholar
17 Boethius, The Theological Tractates (ed. and trans. Stewart, H. F. and Rand, E. K.; Cambridge MA 1946) II 8, for text and translation. I have emended ‘diduci’ to ‘deduci.’ See Marenbon, J., ‘Gilbert of Poitiers,’ HTCWP 328–52 at 338–40 for a discussion of how Gilbert of Poitiers receives these terms, particularly that of mathematics.Google Scholar
18 For the commentaries by Gilbert of Poitiers, see The Commentaries on Boethius by Gilbert of Poitiers (ed. Häring, N. M.; Toronto 1966). For those of Thierry of Chartres, see Commentaries on Boethius by Thierry of Chartres and His School (ed. Häring, N. M.; Toronto 1971). See also the commentary by Clarembald of Arras, in N. M. Häring, Life and Works of Clarembald of Arras, A Twelfth-Century Master of the School of Chartres (Toronto 1965) 61–221. The first scholar to suggest the pervasive influence of Gilbert on Alan's theological thought was Baumgartner, M., Die Philosophie des Alanus de Insulis in Zusammenhang mit den Anschauungen des 12. Jahrhunderts, BGPTM 2 (1896) passim. See also Marenbon, J., ‘A Note on the Porretani,’ HTCWP 353–57 at 354–55 and notes. M. -T. d'Alverny, ‘Maitre Alain—“Nova et Vetera,”’ in Entretiens sur sur la renaissance du xiie siècle sous la direction de Maurice de Gandillac et Edouard Jeauneau (= Decades du centre culturel international de Cerisy-la-Sale N.S. 9; Paris 1968) 117–45 at 122–23, argues plausibly that Alan was at some stage a pupil of Thierry of Chartres.Google Scholar
19 The ‘puella poli’ has been interpreted as Theology by most modern commentators, including Huizinga, J., Über die Verknüpfung des poetischen mit dem theologischen bei Alanus de Insulis (Amsterdam 1932) 34–35. See especially M.-T. d'Alverny, ‘Alan de Lille et la Theologia,’ in L'Homme devant Dieu: Mélanges offerts au Père Henri de Lubac 3 vols. (Paris 1964), II 111–28. Dronke, P., Dante and Medieval Latin Traditions (Cambridge 1986) 12–13, is the only exception to this consensus, when he says that ‘modern scholars … have mostly asserted (without argument) that this puella stands for Theology.’ I hope that the following arguments will prove conclusively that in every respect the characteristics of the ‘puella poli’ coincide with those of Theology as Alan conceived it. At the same time it should be recognised that for Alan a move to theological understanding is not simply a matter of moving through the curriculum: it involves profound psychic resources.Google Scholar
20 Alain de Lille: Textes inédits (ed. M. -T. d'Alverny; Paris 1965) 274–78 at 275.Google Scholar
21 R Glorieux, ed., ‘La Somme “Quoniam homines” d'Alain de Lille,’ AHDL 20 (1953) 113–369, Prologue 119.Google Scholar
22 Häring, N. M., ed., ‘Regulae caelestis iuris,’ AHDL 48 (1981) 7–226, Rule 99, p. 204.Google Scholar
23 Glorieux, ‘La Somme “Quoniam homines” ’ (n. 21 above) Liber I.2, p. 121. See Vasoli, C., ‘La “Theologia apothetica” di Alano di Lilla,’ Rivista critica di storia della filosofia 16 (1961) 153–87, for an account of Alan's concept of Theology.Google Scholar
24 See Dronke, P., ‘Boethius, Alanus, and Dante,’ Romanische Forschungen 78 (1966) 119–25, for the motif of letargo as used in poetic traditions.Google Scholar
25 Stewart and Rand, Boethius, Theological Tractates (n. 17 above) II 8.Google Scholar
26 Ibid. 10.Google Scholar
27 Glorieux, ‘La Somme “Quoniam homines” ’ (n. 21 above) Liber 1, Part 1, 9b, p. 143. Behind this view is a ‘grammatical Platonism,’ according to which the names of things are dependent on the ontological reality of the things to which they refer. For a conspectus of examples, see Jolivet, J., ‘Quelques cas de “platonisme grammatical” du viie au xiie siècle,’ in Mélanges offerts à René Crozet (ed. Gallais, P. and Riou, Y. -J., 2 vols; Poitiers 1966) I 93–99; for the most explicit example of this in the twelfth century, Thierry of Chartres, see Dronke, P., ‘Thierry of Chartres,’ in HTCWP 358–85 at 372–73. For Alan's views of theological language, see Vasoli, ‘La “Theologia apothetica”’ (n. 23 above) 178–84; Chatillon, J., ‘La Méthode théologique d'Alain de Lille,’ in Alain de Lille, Gautier de Chatillon, Jackemart Gielée et leur temps (ed. Roussel, H. and Suard, F., Actes du colloque de Lille 1978; Lille 1978) 47–60; and Evans, G. R., Alan of Lille: The Frontiers of Theology in the Later Twelfth Century (Cambridge 1983) 29–41.Google Scholar
28 See Ochsenbein, , Studien (n. 1 above) 168–69 for a conspectus of views all agreeing on the fundamental incoherence of the ethical section of the poem. Among the citations he adduces, the following speak for the general view: Huizinga, Über die Verknüpfung (n. 19 above) 74: ‘Je mehr Figuren aufgezählt werden, desto weiter scheint der Sinn dieser Allegorie sich von jeder christlichen Grundlage zu entfernen und sich ins vage und bloss Rhetorische zu verflüchtigen…. Nur eine seichte dichterische Phantasie, welche ihre klassischen Muster, die selbst schön stark rhetorisch waren, gedankenlos übernimmt und weiterführt, hat hier das Wort’; or Jung, Études sur le poème allégorique (n. 4 above) 80: ‘Alain de Lille ne semble pas suivre un systéme défini. Ne cherchons pas la cohérence là où on ne saurait la trouver.’Google Scholar
It is one of the great merits of Ochsenbein (Studien) to have given a largely convincing account of the coherence of this section of the poem (137–185). My discussion is indebted to his in important ways; I signal one point of disagreement in note 42, rather than the many points of agreement, in the notes which follow.
29 De virtutibus et de vitiis et de donis spiritus sancti, ed. Lottin, O., in Psychologie et morale aux xiie et xiiie siècles (6 vols. Louvain–Gembloux 1960) VI. 45–92, caput I, art. 1, p. 47. My whole account of Alan's concept of virtue is indebted to Delhaye, P., ‘La virtue et les vices dans les oeuvres d'Alain de Lille,’ Cahiers de civilisation médiévale 6 (1963) 13–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
30 Lottin, , De virtutibus caput I, art. 1, p. 48.Google Scholar
31 Ibid. 48–49.Google Scholar
32 Ibid. 50. See also Häring, Regulae (n. 22 above), Rule 75, pp. 183–84.Google Scholar
33 Lottin, , De virtutibus caput I, art. 1, p. 50. Alan's use of the concept ‘political’ virtue may have its origin in Macrobius’ Commentary on the Dream of Scipio 1.8 (trans. Stahl, W. H., New York 1952) 120–22. See Lottin, , Psychologie et morale III. 1 (Louvain–Gembloux 1949) 103–15, for the use of the term ‘political virtues.’Google Scholar
34 Lottin, , De virtutibus caput I, art. 2, p. 54.Google Scholar
35 Cicero, , De officiis 1.3.9 (ed. and trans. Miller, W. [London-Cambridge MA 1947] 10).Google Scholar
36 Das Moralium dogma philosophorum des Guillaume de Conches (ed. Holmberg, J.; Paris–Uppsala–Leipzig 1929) I.A, p. 8.Google Scholar
37 Ochsenbein, , Studien (n. 1 above) 173–74 and Georgi, A., Das lateinische und deutsche Preisgedicht des Mittelalters (Berlin 1969) 8–20.Google Scholar
38 Rhetorica ad Herennium 3.7.13–16 (ed. and trans. Caplan, H. [London-Cambridge MA 1954] 178–82).Google Scholar
39 Ochsenbein, , Studien (n. 1 above) 172–73.Google Scholar
40 Holmberg, , Moralium dogma I, p. 8.Google Scholar
41 Holmberg, , Moralium dogma II, pp. 52–53.Google Scholar
42 Ochsenbein, , Studien (n. 1 above) 170 seems to suggest that Prudentia/Fronesis represents a Cardinal Virtue in the endowment of Book VII; surely Ratio better fits the definitions of Prudentia as a Cardinal Virtue.Google Scholar
43 Wetherbee, ‘Philosophy, Cosmology, and the Twelfth-Century Renaissance’ (n. 1 above) 52.Google Scholar
44 Bossuat, , Alain de Lille, Anticlaudianus (n. 4 above) 56.Google Scholar
45 Jourdain, C., ‘Des commentaires inédits de Guillaume de Conches et de Nicolas Triveth sur la Consolation de la Philosophie de Boèce,’ in Notices et extraits des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Impériale 20.2 (Paris 1861) 35. William makes one exception to the rule that one should move from the practical to the theoretical sciences, ‘causa communis utilitatis.’ This qualification would seem to derive from Cicero, De officiis 1.43.153.Google Scholar
M. Grabmann, Die Geschichte der scholastichen Methode, 2 vols. (Freiburg 1909–1911) II 37, cites a very interesting Bamberg manuscript from the second half of the twelfth century, which is clearly working in the same hierarchies of science as William. After outlining the Aristotelian division, the author goes on to discuss the order of the sciences: ‘… Non enim quocumque ordine artes addiscende sunt. Ordo enim in omnibus tenendus est. Litera scilicet P, quam Boetius in inferiori parte vestis philosophie dicit depictam, designat a practica esse incipiendum et per gradus interpositos ad T, ad i.e. contemplationem sive theoricam ascendendum…. In philosophia ut diximus auctoritate Boetii a practica incipiendum est. [Here he outlines the order of the practical sciences: ethics, economics, politics. After outlining the first two steps of the theoretical sciences, which he, surprisingly, places in the order mathematics and physics, he goes on to the final stage of education.] … Hinc ad theologiam pervenitur, que est cognitio rerum divinarum que solo intellectu capiuntur.’
It should also be observed that such hierarchies were adduced in the interpretation of noetic allegories. Thus Bernard Sylvestris describes the cursus in his commentary on the De nuptiis; after having studied poesis and the Trivium, the student should approach philosophy, beginning with practical and moving to theoretical, and not vice-versa: ‘Nam quamvis dignitate precedat accionem contemplatio, illa tamen ordine doctrine prior est. Vides enim que priora sunt natura, doctrina sunt tamen posteriora.’ At this point he goes on to articulate the ‘Aristotelian’ division of the practical and theoretical sciences. The Commentary on Martianus Capella's “De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii” Attributed to Bernardus Silvestris (Studies and Texts 80, ed. Westra H. J.; Toronto 1986) 12.
46 In his Metalogicon (1.24.854c), John of Salisbury describes Ethics as pre-eminent among the sciences: ‘Illa autem que ceteris philosophie partibus preminet, Ethicam dico, sine qua nec philosophi subsistit nomen, collati decoris gratia omnes alias antecedit.’ Ioannis Saresburiensis Episcopi Carnotensis Metalogicon libri III (ed. Webb, C. C. J.; Oxford 1929; p. 55). John is working within the so-called Platonic division of the sciences: Physics, Logic, and Ethics.Google Scholar
47 ‘Supercelestis uero scientia theologia, i.e. suis non fraudatur maximis. Habet enim regulas digniores sui obscuritate et subtilitate ceteris preminentes. Et cum ceterarum regularum tota necessitas nutet, quia in consuetudine sola est consistens penes consuetum nature decursum, necessitas theologicarum maximarum absoluta est et irrefragabilis quia de his fidem faciunt que actu uel natura mutari non possunt. Vnde propter inmutabilem sui necessitatem et gloriosam sui subtilitatem a philosophis paradoxa dicuntur quasi recte gloriose propter sui obscuritatem; enigmata propter internum intelligentie splendorem dicuntur; emblemata quia puriore mentis acumine comprehenduntur.’ Cited from Häring, Regulae (n. 22 above) Prologue, p. 122. For the relation between the terms used by Alan here to describe the excellence of Theology and those used by Gilbert of Poitiers in his De hebdomadibus commentary, see Jolivet, J., ‘Remarques sur les “Regulae Theologicae” d'Alain de Lille,’ in Alain de Lille, Gautier de Chatillon, Jackemart Gielée et leur temps (ed. Roussel, H. and Suard, F., Actes du Colloques de Lille, 1978; Lille 1980) 83–99 at 88–89.Google Scholar
48 Lottin, , De virtutibus (n. 29 above) caput I, art. 3, p. 59. For Alan's understanding of the difference between natural and informed virtues, see Delhaye, ‘La virtue et les vices’ (n. 29 above) 20–21.Google Scholar
49 Lottin, , De virtutibus (n. 29 above) caput I, art. 3, p. 58.Google Scholar
50 Jung, , Études sur le poéme allégorique (n. 4 above) 83. From the remarks cited by Wetherbee, ‘Philosophy, Cosmology, and the Twelfth-Century Renaissance’ (n. 1 above) 52–53, it would seem implicit that for him Fronesis is the heroine of the poem, as it would seem implicit in the argument of Green, ‘Alan of Lille's Anticlaudianus,’ who reads the poem as an ascensus mentis ad deum. Sheridan, J. J., trans., Alan of Lille, Anticlaudianus, or the Good and Perfect Man (Toronto 1973) also supports this position: ‘The epic figure that predominates is Phronesis’ (28). Jauss, H. R., ‘Form und Auffassung der Allegorie in der Tradition der “Psychomachia” ’ in Medium aevum vivum: Festschrift für Walter Bulst (ed. Jauss, H. R. and Schaller, D.; Heidelberg 1960) 179–206, argues that the iuvenis is the key figure of the poem, even if his meaning, along with the allegorical form of the poem, remains hidden: ‘Da der iuvenis zweifellos die Schlüsselfigur des Anticlaudianus darstellt, muß uns mit seiner Bedeutung auch der allegorischen Form dieses Werkes verborgen bleiben’ (198). For a conspectus of views, see Meier, C., ‘Zum Problem der allegorischen Interpretation mittelalterliche Dichtung,’ Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur 99 (1977) 250–96 at 252–53, to which should be added Chance, J., ‘The Artist as Epic Hero in Alan of Lille's Anticlaudianus,’ Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 18 (1983) 238–47, who argues that the Artist is the epic hero of the poem.Google Scholar
51 Jung, , Études sur le poéme allégorique (n. 4 above) is in fact more categorical in his negation: ‘Or, pour nôtre propos, il importe seulement de retenir que le char allégorique d'Alain de Lille n'est pas un char de l’âme. Comment pourrait-il l’être, s'il doit précisément faire l'ascension du ciel pour y aller querir une âme?’ (83).Google Scholar
52 Ochsenbein, , Studien (n. 1 above) concludes his work with a characteristically frank admission of what he sees as the fundamental lack of unity in the poem: ‘… weil die Dichtung—fur den modernen Leser wenigstens—als ein sehr uneinheitliches Gebilde erscheint … Bedenken treten auf, ob sich der Anticlaudianus überhaupt als geschlossenes Ganzes erweisen lässt oder ob er nicht in einzelne Teile auseinanderfallt. Vor allem lässt sich zwischen dem ersten und zweiten Teil, also zwischen dem consilium Naturae und der Himmelsreise der Prudentia einerseits und der Gabenbeschenkung und dem Kampf andererseits, nur sehr schwer eine innere Beziehung herstellen’ (192).Google Scholar
53 Bossuat, , Alain de Lille, Anticlaudianus (n. 4 above) 56.Google Scholar
54 Glorieux, ‘La Somme “Quoniam homines” ’ (n. 21 above) 121.Google Scholar
55 PL 210.796.Google Scholar
56 Stewart and Rand, Boethius: Theological Tractates (n. 17 above) II 12.Google Scholar
57 Häring, , Regulae (n. 22 above) Rule 13, p. 135.Google Scholar
58 Ibid., Rule 16, p. 136.Google Scholar
59 Alan discusses the concept theophania at length in two loci, the Quoniam homines 2.14 (ed. Glorieux [n. 21 above] 282–83), and the Expositio prosae de angelis (d'Alverny, Alain de Lille, Textes inédits [n. 20 above] 205). In both instances he draws on Boethius's De Trinitate, Book II, and in particular on the idea that ‘cum de deo ratiocinamur non oportet nos deduci ad ymaginationes.’ In my view, Alan's negative theology in matters of language derives its coherence fundamentally from Boethius's theological tractates; Alan exploits the coincidence of linguistic theory he finds in Boethius and Scotus Eriugena with the term theophania.Google Scholar
60 Häring, , Regulae (n. 22 above) Rule 18, p. 137.Google Scholar
61 Ibid. See also Rule 36, p. 149, and the references in nn. 25–27 above.Google Scholar
62 Faral, E., Les Arts poétiques du xiie et du xiiie siècles (Paris 1962) lines 43–49, p. 198.Google Scholar
63 For a conspectus of psychological thought in the twelfth century, see Michaud-Quantin, P., ‘La classification des puissances de l’âme au xiie siècle,’ Revue du Moyen Age Latin 5 (1949) 15–34.Google Scholar
64 William of Conches, Glosae super Platonem (ed. Jeauneau, E.; Paris 1965) para. 34, p. 100.Google Scholar
65 Glosa super Boethii librum De Trinitate 2.7, in Commentaries on Boethius by Thierry of Chartres and his School (ed. N. M. Häring, Toronto 1971) 257–300, at 269–70. See Dronke, P., ‘Thierry of Chartres,’ in HTCWP 358–85 at 365–67 for discussion of these terms in Thierry's usage. See Parent, J. M., La Doctrine de la création dans l’école de Chartres (Paris 1938) 29–32 for a wider account of ‘Chartrian’ psychology.Google Scholar
66 Thierry defines intelligibilitas as ‘… vis animae removens ab his formis omnes terminos quibus inter se distinctae erant atque quod de ipsis remanet solum esse atque etiam contemplans omnem pluralitatem inde absterret omniumque simplicem contuetur unionem’ (Häring, Glosa super Boethii librum De Trinitate 2.8 [n. 65 above] 270).Google Scholar
67 Ibid. 270.Google Scholar
68 Glorieux, ‘La Somme “Quoniam hominess” ’ (n. 21 above) Liber I.2, p. 121. See n. 23 above for a further reference.Google Scholar
69 d'Alverny, , Textes inédits (n. 59 above) 303. See Dronke, P., Fabula: Explorations into the Uses of Myth in Medieval Platonism (Mittellateinischen Studien und Texte 9, Leiden 1974) chap. 5, for a discussion of this sermon.Google Scholar
70 d'Alverny, , Textes inédits (n. 59 above) 243.Google Scholar
71 Häring, , Glosa super librum De Trinitate 2.8 (n. 65 above) 270.Google Scholar
72 Cited from William of Conches, Glosae super Priscianum Instit. II, 18, as cited in Jeauneau, Glosae super Platonem (n. 64 above) 129 n. (a). John of Salisbury also discusses the role of the intellectus (for which he used the word intelligentia interchangeably): ‘Verum si ad incorporea divertendum est, ratione opus est et intellectu, cum absque intelligentia haec non valeant comprehendi, et verum non possit esse de his sine ratione iudicium. Intellectus itaque aliis deficientibus exercit vires suas, et quasi in arce animae constitutus omnia inferiora complectitur, cum ab inferioribus superiora nequeant comprehendi. Et nunc quidem res ut sunt, nunc aliter intuetur, nunc simpliciter, nunc composite, nunc disiuncta coniungit, nunc coniuncta distrahit et disiungit…. Coniuncta vero disiungit, ut si formam teneat absque materia, cum tamen sine ea forma omnino esse non possit…. Sed licet aliter quam sint, dum tamen simpliciter, coniuncta disiungat, non inanis erit conceptio, quae totius investigationis sapientiae expeditissimam parit viam. Hic est enim totius philosophiae instrumentun, quod et mentem mira subtilitate exacuit et res singulas a se invicem naturae suae proprietate distinguit.’ Ioannis Sarisburiensis Episcopi Carnotiensis Policratici, sive de nugis curialium et vestigiis philosophorum libri VIII (2 vols., ed. Webb, C. C. J.; Oxford 1909) I. II. 18, 437b–438a, pp. 103–104.Google Scholar
73 Cited from William of Conches, Glosae super Prisicianum, Instit. II.XVII. 17, as cited by Jeauneau, Glosae super Platonem (n. 64 above) 129 note (a). Wiliam's views on the limitations of ‘grammarians’ (under which term we would include literary critics) coincide with Alan's. Base grammarians are excluded from the images on Grammar's dress:Google Scholar
Hec scriptura tenet, minime dignata fateri
Grammaticos humiles, qui sola cortice gaudent,
Quos non dimittit intus pinguedo medulle:
Si foris exposcunt framenta, putamine solo
Contenti, nequeunt nuclei libare saporem.
(II.509–512)
74 See, for example, Caplan, Rhetorica ad Herennium III.ix. 16–17. But the order specified there applies to oratory rather than narration. The notion, as received by poets, derives especially from Horace, De arte poetica 42–44. See Quadlbauer, F., ‘Zur Theorie der Komposition in der mittelalterlichen Rhetorik und Poetik,’ in Rhetoric Revalued (Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies 19, ed. Vickers, B.; Binghamton NY 1982) 115–31, for a coherent treatment of the two orders. See Faral, , Les Arts poétiques (n. 62 above) 56–59, and Hunt, T., ‘Tradition and Originality in the Prologues of Chrestien de Troyes,’ Forum for Modern Language Studies 8 (1972) 320–37 at 332–34 for further references. Alan may have written a commentary on the Ad Herennium (d'Alverny, Textes inédits [n. 20 above] 52–55).Google Scholar
75 Hugo de Sancto Victore Didascalicon De studio legendi 3.8 (ed. Buttimer, C. H.; Washington DC 1939 p. 58).Google Scholar
76 Faral, , Les Arts poétiques lines 87–100, p. 200.Google Scholar
77 Faral, , ibid. I.2, p. 265. The notion that the artificial order is more sophisticated is an idea of long standing; Faral, Les Arts poétiques 56, cites a commentary by Alcuin or by someone of his school on Horace's Ars poetica, lines 42–45, which begins: ‘Nam sententia talis est: quicumque promittit se facturum bonum carmen et lucidum habere ordinem, amet artificialem ordinem et spernat naturalem.’Google Scholar
78 It is worth noting, moreover, that the Poetria nova is often found in manuscripts where we also find the Anticlaudianus; there are, for example, 29 MSS containing the Anticlaudianus in British libraries. Of these, no fewer than 6 also contain the Poetria nova. See Gibson, M. T. and Palmer, N. F., ‘Manuscripts of Alan of Lille: Anticlaudianus in the British Isles,’ Studi Medievali, ser. 3 28 (1987) 905–1001.Google Scholar
79 The Commentary on the First Six Books of the Aeneid, Prologue (ed. Jones, J. W. and Jones, E. F.; Lincoln-London 1977) 1–2.Google Scholar
80 Ibid. 1.Google Scholar
81 Ibid. 3. See Medieval Literary Theory and Criticism, c. 1100–c. 1375: The Commentary Tradition (ed. Minnis, A. J. and Scott, A. B.; Oxford 1988) 150 n. 151 for the Macrobian background to this tradition of Virgil as poet and philosopher.Google Scholar
82 The fact that Aeneas reaches philosophical maturity in Book VI, according to this interpretation, may be significant for my own interpretation of the Anticlaudianus, since, as will be argued below, it seems to me that Book VI of Alan's poem is also the apogee of philosophical/theological understanding. For the twelfth-century interpretation of the Aeneid as a Bildungsroman, see also Webb, Polycraticus 8.24 (n. 72 above) 415–17, where the existence of a double order of narration is also implicit.Google Scholar
83 It may also be relevant here to remark that in Book VI of the Aeneid (Anchises's speech, esp. lines 724–751), just as in Book VI of the Anticlaudianus, the soul's ultimate origins are treated.Google Scholar
84 Faral, , Les Arts poétiques, lines 118–125 (n. 62 above) 201.Google Scholar
85 See, for example, De planctu naturae, where Genius's right hand paints human ideals, while his left is responsible for figures of vice (Häring, De planctu naturae XVIII, lines 64–91, pp. 875–76).Google Scholar
86 Evans, , Alan of Lille: The Frontiers of Theology (n. 27 above) 164.Google Scholar
87 I place inverted commas around the word ‘virtue’ with respect to Fronesis, since in the De virtutibus et vitiis Alan specifically denies that reason and intellect are strictly speaking virtues at all: ‘Cetere etiam potentie que non habent vitia sibi opposita, ut ratio, intellectus, memoria virtutes esse non possunt, quia vi non stant. Huiusmodi enim potentie operantur ad exercitium virtutum; ordinante enim ratione vel intellectu surgit usus prudentie vel fortitudinis’ (Lottin, De virtutibus caput I, art. 1, p. 50).Google Scholar
88 Alan was certainly familiar with the Platonic image of the chariot of the soul; he uses it in the Sermo de sphaera intelligibili, for example; see d'Alverny, , Textes inédits 302, and n. 41, for further examples. The image was celebrated through its appearance in Boethius, De consolatione Philosophiae, III metre ix, lines 18–21. It was also available to Alan through Calcidius’ commentary on the Timaeus. See Calcidius, Commentarius in Timaeum Platonis (ed. Waszink, J. H.; London 1962) 41. E, p. 36.Google Scholar
89 Westra, , Commentary on Martianus Capella's “De Nuptiis” 2.114 (n. 45 above) 47. Discussed in Jeauneau, E., ‘Notes sur l’école de Chartres,’ Studi Medievali 5 (1964) 821–65 at 857.Google Scholar
90 It is apposite here to remember what seems to me an exact and far-reaching statement by Huizinga. In section IV of his book on the relations between the poetic and the theological in Alan's works, Huizinga discusses Alan's uses of pictures; he says that through poetic pictures, Alan wants to express what his theology cannot: ‘das zentrale Wunder der Erschaffung der Formen’ (Huizinga, Über die Verknüpfung [n. 19 above] 65).Google Scholar