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 Courçon, 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[ënza], 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. § 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.
…Chaldeans, whose superstitions and wantonness nevertheless they shuddered at. And the teacher (l) of the gentiles himself would not have introduced (m) some verses of the poets into his own writings or sayings.
[On this Gratian comments:]
Then why[R] are those [writings] forbidden to be read which, it …
(l) For we read that when Paul had come to Athens he saw an altar of the Unknown God on which it was written: "This is an altar of[S] the Unknown God in whom we live and move and have our being." And with this inscription the Apostle began his exhortation and made known to those Athenians the meaning of this inscription,—continuing about our God and saying: "Whom you pronounce Unknown, Him declare I unto you and worship." Then Dionysius,[T] the Areopagite, seeing a blind man passing by said to him (i.e. Paul), "If you will give sight to that blind man I will believe you." Immediately, when the name of Christ had been invoked, he was restored to sight and Dionysius believed.
(m) E.g. In the Epistle of Paul to Titus,[U] the quotation from Epimenides the poet: "The Cretians are always liars, evil beasts, slow bellies." I. quaest, i. dominus declaravit.
Also he introduced in the first Epistle to the Corinthians this from Menander: "Evil communications often corrupt good manners." XXVIII. quaestio I. saepe.
He used also this verse: "I shall hate if I can: if not, I shall love against my will." But Jerome in his fifth division on Consecration often used verses from Virgil and Augustine, this of Lucan's: "Mens hausti nulla" &c. XXVI. quaestio V. nee mirum. And, as a lawyer, he uses the authority of Vergil, ff. de rerum divisione, intantrum § cenotaphium; and also, of Homer, insti. de Dontrahen. emp. § pretium.
…is shown so reasonably, should be read? Some (n) read profane literature for their pleasure, being delighted with the productions of the poets and the charm of their words; while others learn them to add to their knowledge, in order that through reading the errors, of the heathen they may denounce them, and that they may turn to the service of sacred and devout learning the useful things they find therein. Such are praiseworthy in adding to their learning profane literature. Whence blessed Gregory did not blame a certain bishop for learning it but because, contrary to his episcopal obligation, he read grammar to the people in place of the Gospel lesson.
Hence also Ambrose writes concerning Luke:
=Profane writings should be read that they may not be unknown.=
Some we read (o) that we may not neglect (a) them; we read that we may not be ignorant of them; we read not that we may embrace them but that we may reject them.(b)
So Jerome on the Epistle to Titus:
=Grammar should be read in order that through it the Sacred
Scriptures may be understood.=
If anyone[V] has learned grammar or dialectics in order to have the ability to speak correctly and to discriminate between the true and the false, we do not blame them. Geometry (c) and Arithmetic and Music contain truth in their own range of knowledge, but that knowledge is not the knowledge of piety. The knowledge of piety is,—to know the law, to understand the prophets, to believe the Gospel, (and) not to be ignorant of the Apostles. Moreover the teaching of the grammarians can contribute to life, provided it has been applied to its higher uses.
Idem:
=From the example of Daniel it is established that it is not a sin to be learned in profane literature.=[W]
(n) Whence Saint Gregory in his LXXXVI Division, and in many places.
(o) This entire section should be read with regard to profane knowledge according to Jerome, and the threefold reason why it should be acquired is shown: namely that it be not neglected, that it be not unknown, that it may be refuted[X]. So we read some, as the Old and New Testament, that we may not neglect them. Some we read (as the Arts) that we may not be ignorant of them. Some, as the writings of the heretics, that we may refute them. Some (we read) that they be not neglected, as the Old Testament.
(a) For although of no use yet knowledge of them is necessary, as in dist. VII. cap. ult.
(b) As the books of heretics. As XXIV. quaestio III. cap. ult.
(c) Geometry. He does not mention Astronomy because this subject has fallen into disuse as XXVJ. quaest. II. § his ita.
Those who are unwilling to partake of the table (d) [i.e. meat] and wine of the king, that they may not be defiled, surely would never consent to learn that which was unlawful if they knew that (e) the wisdom and learning of the Babylonians was sinful. They learn, however, not that they may conform thereto, but that they may judge and convict. For example, if any one ignorant of mathematics should wish to write against the mathematicians, he would expose himself to ridicule; also in contending against the philosophers, if he should be ignorant of the dogmas of the philosophers. With this intent therefore they would learn the wisdom of the Chaldeans just as Moses had learned all the wisdom of the Egyptians. So too: If ever we are compelled to call to mind profane literature, and from it to learn things we before had omitted, it is not a matter of our personal desire, but, so to speak, of the weightiest necessity,—in order that we may prove that those events which were foretold (f) many ages ago by the holy prophets are contained (g) in the writings of the Greeks, as well as in those of the Latins and other Gentiles.
So, too, from the synod of Pope Eugene:
=Bishops should appoint teachers and instructors in suitable places.=[Y]
The report has come to us with regard to certain regions that neither teachers, nor care for the pursuit of letters, is found. Therefore, in every way, care and diligence should be used by all the bishops among the peoples subject to them, and in other places where the necessity may arise, that teachers and instructors be appointed to teach assiduously the pursuit of letters and the principles of the liberal arts, because in them especially are the divine commands revealed and declared.
Likewise Augustine in his book against the Manichaeans:
=The vanity of the gentiles is repressed and refuted by the use of their own authorities.=
If the Sibyl or Orpheus or other soothsayers of the gentiles,
(d) Daniel, Ananias, Misael[Z], Azarias.[AA] For it is disgraceful for one who is in a discussion not to know the law in question.
(e) From the fact that Jerome here quotes the example of Daniel, the argument is derived that in doubtful cases recourse should be had to the example of our forefathers and others. XVI. quaest. I. sunt nonnulli. XXII. quaest. I. ut noveritis. I quaest. VII. convenientibus. XII. quaest. II questa. XVI. quaest. III. praesulum. XVI. quaest. I. cap. ult. XXVI. quaest. II. non statutum. et cap. non examplo. C. de sen. et interlo. nemo[AB] contra. The solution is that where rules fail recourse must be had from similars to similars, otherwise not. XX. distinct. de quibus;[AC] assuming that it is as there stated. Likewise the argument holds that good is assumed from the very fact that it has come from something good. As VII. quaest. I. omnis qui. & XXXIIII. quaest. I. cum beatissimus. IX. quaest. II. Lugdunensis. XII. quaest. I. expedit. XXVIII. quaest. I. sic enim. XXXI distinct, omnino. John.
(f) For example, as to the Incarnation, that passage in Virgil[AD]: "Jam nova progenies caelo demittitur ab alto."
(g) As that passage from Ovid[AE], "Odero si potero: si non, invitus amabo."
[The notes on the remaining paragraphs of the text are here omitted owing to their length.]
…or philosophers, are said to have foretold any truth, it certainly has weight in overcoming the vanity of the pagans; not, however, in leading to the acceptance of their authority. For as great as is the difference between the prediction of the coming of Christ by the angels and the confession of the devils, so great a difference is there between the authority of the prophets and the curiosity of the sacrilegious.
Likewise Pope Clement:
=For the understanding of Sacred Scriptures knowledge of profane writings is shown to be necessary.=
It has been reported to us that certain ones dwelling in your parts are opposed to the sacred teaching, and seem to teach just as it seems best to them, not according to the tradition of the fathers, but after their own understanding; for, as we have heard, certain ingenious men of your parts draw many analogies of the truth from the books they read. And there special care must be taken that when the law of God is read, it be not read or taught according to the individual's own mental ability and intelligence. For there are many words in divine scripture which can be drawn into that meaning which each one, of his own will, may assume for himself; but this should not be so, for you ought not to seek out a meaning that is external, foreign, and strange, in order, by any means whatsoever, to establish your view from the authority of scriptures; but you should derive from the scriptures themselves the meaning of the truth. And therefore it is fitting to gain knowledge of the scriptures from him who guards it according to the truth handed down to him by the fathers, and that he may be able correctly to impart that which he rightly learned. For when each one has learned from divine scriptures a sound and firm rule of truth, it will not be strange if from the common culture and liberal studies, which perhaps he touched upon in his youth, he should also bring something to the support of true doctrine,—in such manner, however, that when he learns the truth, he rejects the false and the feigned.
Likewise Isidorus in his book of Maxims:
=Why Christians should be forbidden read the productions of the poets.=
Christians are forbidden to read the productions of the poets because through the allurements of their fables the mind is too much stimulated toward the incentives to unlawful desires.
For not only by the offering of incense is sacrifice made to devils, but also by accepting too readily their sayings.
[Gratian draws the CONCLUSION.]
As therefore is evident from the authorities already quoted ignorance ought to be odious to priests. Since, if in ignorance of their own blindness they undertake to lead others, both fall into the ditch. Wherefore in the Psalm it is said: "Let their eyes be darkened that they may not see, and bow down their back always." For when those who go ahead are darkened, they who follow are easily inclined to bear the burdens of sinners. Therefore priests must endeavor to cast off ignorance from them as if it were a sort of pestilence. For although, in a few instances, it is said that a slave is flogged who does not do his master's will through ignorance of that will, this is not, generally understood of all. For the Apostle says: "If any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant," which is to be understood as referring to him who did not wish to have knowledge that he might do well.
Hence Augustine in his book of Questions:
Not every man who is ignorant is free from the penalty. For the ignorant man who is ignorant because he found no way of learning (the law) can be excused from the penalty, while he cannot be pardoned who having the means of knowledge did not use them.[31]
(d) Theology