The Lemma De predicatoribus in Iacobus de Benevento’s Viridarium consolationis: An Unexpected Preaching Tract in a Dominican Florilegium

ABSTRACT

This article introduces editions of two distinct versions of a short Latin text on preaching that appears in an influential Latin florilegium. While the voice of the compiler is absent or minimal in the other topics covered by this anthology of authoritative quotations, the lemma De predicatoribus contains extensive original lines composed by the florilegist, Iacobus de Benevento (c. 1255/71). Because this florilegium was intended primarily as a resource for preachers to compose sermons, its reception in later texts probably includes some of those original lines authored by Iacobus, unwittingly disseminated in Latin and Romance language sermons and perhaps examples of ars predicandi along with the transmitted quotations, where they would likely be misattributed to major authors such as Gregory the Great.

KEYWORDS:

• Viridarium consolationis
• florilegia
• Iacobus de Benevento
• Dominican order
• reform
• preaching
• Gregory the Great
• Bernard of Clairvaux

In a previous issue of this journal,¹ I published an edition of the lemma Predicacio from Manipulus florum, an influential early fourteenth-century florilegium compiled at the Sorbonne by Thomas of Ireland (fl. 1295–before 1338).² This article includes editions of a section on preaching from two versions of another Latin florilegium, though the nature of these texts is decidedly different from Thomas’ collection of authoritative quotations on the subject. The texts for the present editions are from another important example of the genre, Viridarium consolationis (Garden of consolation), a mid-thirteenth-century florilegium that survives in over 150 Latin manuscripts and, unlike Manipulus florum, was also translated into several vernacular languages during the late Middle Ages.³ The Latin text was published in 1880 from a transcription made by the Benedictine monks of Montecassino under the direction of their abbot, Luigi Tosti (1811–97); this text from a fifteenth-century manuscript (Montecassino, Archivio dell’Abbazia, MS 207, pp. 255–326) was attributed by Tosti to St Bonaventure, OFM (1221–74).⁴ However, in 1951 Tommaso Kaeppeli established that the compiler of Viridarium was actually a Dominican friar named Iacobus de Benevento (c. 1255/71), citing the ascription provided in an early manuscript copy at Modena,⁵ and this attribution has been widely accepted in scholarly circles.⁶ Very little is known of Iacopo of Benevento; Kaeppeli found his name recorded in three documents involving the Dominican order that were produced in central Italy from 1255 to 1271, and also in Geraldo di Frachet’s (1205 –74) Vitae fratrum (1255–60), where Iacopo is praised as ‘a most excellent preacher’. In addition to these few historical records, Kaeppeli reports that Iacobus de Benevento is attributed in manuscripts as the author of several theological tracts, a moralizing poem, and collections of sermones de tempore (seven manuscripts) and sermones de sanctis (three manuscripts), as well as Viridarium consolationis, which is by far the most widely disseminated text he produced.⁷

The Lemma De predicatoribus in Tosti’s Edition

Tosti’s printed text of Viridarium comprises about 1,000 quotations organized under 87 lemmata,⁸ a relatively short florilegium in comparison to Thomas of Ireland’s Manipulus florum, which contains about 6,000 quotations divided among 266 lemmata,⁹ and other examples of medieval Latin florilegia, such as Flores paradisi, which contains about 14,000 quotations.¹⁰ Viridarium is organized into five partes; while the first four sections deal with vices and virtues, Pars V: De aliis rebus treats a variety of other subjects of moral, pastoral, and theological interest, including a section on preachers that cites sixteen quotations attributed to various venerable auctores as well as a number of biblical passages. After conducting a close analysis I have determined that about thirty percent of De predicatoribus in Tosti’s edition (over 400 of the total of 1,240 words) are not quotations from the authoritative sources Iacobus cites; rather, they are almost certainly Iacobus’ own words. This approach stands in stark contrast to nearly all the other lemmata in Viridarium, where Iacobus limited his voice to the brief definition following the rubric and preceding the series of authoritative quotations that follows under a given topic, though in some cases he remains silent and relies on the definitions from cited or uncited authorities. However, in a few lemmata in Pars V that deal with clerical reform, including De prelatis ecclesiasticis (5.9), De doctoribus sacre scripture (5.11), and De predicatoribus (5.12), Iacobus took a very different approach by adding his own words among the transmitted quotations.¹¹ In the case of De predicatoribus, this practice effectively rendered the lemma into a short reform tract on the office of preaching that incorporates Iacobus’ original lines along with the selected quotations, but without indicating that he has added his own voice to those of the venerable authors he cites in promoting the reform of preachers.

The Manuscript Tradition of Viridarium

Because the Montecassino manuscript was created long after Viridarium was written, I compared the text of De predicatoribus in Tosti’s edition to the version that appears in Modena, Biblioteca Estense Universitaria, MS Lat. 1163 (fols 41^vb–43^ra), a thirteenth-century manuscript that is the oldest known copy and one of only two in the corpus that attribute Viridarium to Iacobus de Benevento, nearly all others being anonymous.¹² The Modena manuscript’s version of De predicatoribus is about twenty-five percent shorter than the version in Tosti’s edition, lacking several biblical and patristic quotations that appear in the Montecassino manuscript, but also including two quotations that are not found in Tosti’s edition; the Modena manuscript also lacks one of the lines that was apparently composed by Iacobus, and several of those passages are shorter. These differences suggest that the longer version in the manuscript at Montecassino is an expansion on Iacobus’ original version of Viridarium, though it is also possible that the Modena version is an abridged version of an original longer text represented by the Montecassino manuscript.

In attempting to determine the relationship between these two versions I also consulted the text of De predicatoribus in eight manuscripts containing Viridarium that are freely provided online, including one at Bologna, three at Mainz, one at Yale University, one at Paris, and two at Prague.¹³ Surprisingly, the lemma De predicatoribus in these eight copies does not align with either the longer Montecassino version or the shorter version in the Modena manuscript; instead, they are all copies of a much shorter version that retains only three quotations from Gregory the Great and two from the Bible, along with several of the lines authored by Iacobus. It is this highly abbreviated version that seems to have been rendered into Italian and Castilian.¹⁴ Until an exhaustive survey of all extant manuscripts containing the various Latin versions can be done, I would offer the following tentative theory for the relationship between these three versions: Given its attribution to Iacobus (twice, in both the rubric and the colophon) and the early date of the manuscript (no other manuscript containing Viridarium has been dated to the thirteenth century), it seems that the text in the Modena manuscript is probably Iacobus’ original version of this florilegium; the longer Montecassino version is likely an expanded recension that Iacobus created himself, considering that it contains longer versions of Iacobus’ own lines and one additional sentence that he authored; and finally the much shorter version that seems to be dominant in the manuscript tradition was likely abridged by an editor/scribe at some point in the fourteenth century; I refer to this version as ‘the Abridgement’. This explanation is bolstered by the comparative analysis of the three versions of De predicatoribus that follows, but whether the Abridgement was made from a copy of the Modena version or a copy of the Montecassino version is uncertain, as explained below.

Key Original Lines in ‘De predicatoribus’

The most notable expressions of Iacobus’ voice in all three versions of this text are exhortations, warnings and injunctions aimed directly at preachers. Iacobus tells us in his Preface to Viridarium that he intended this collection of authoritative sententiae ‘for the use of all, but especially for those who propound the word of God to others’.¹⁵ There are three lines authored by Iacobus that appear in all three versions, starting with the statement of his theme, the commonplace ideal from Matthew 23. 3 that preachers should practice what they preach: ‘Unde quia de natura lucis sunt, semper lucere oportet predicator. Debent autem lucere predicatores vita et doctrina, quod si sola doctrina luxerint et non vita, semetipsos gladio increpationis proprie condempnabunt’ [‘Thus, because they have the nature of light, a preacher should always shine forth. But preachers should shine both in their life and in their teaching, for if they shine only in their teaching and not in their life, they will condemn themselves with the sword of their own rebuke’].¹⁶ This line from Tosti’s edition agrees with the Abridgement but they both differ from the Modena manuscript, which says ‘they kill themselves’ (‘interimunt’), rather than condemn themselves, with the sword of their own rebuke. This variant is surely an error in the Modena manuscript, since the verb is in the present tense instead of the future, and the following supporting quotation from Radulfus Ardens’ (d. c. 1200) Speculum universale (misattributed in the Montecassino and Modena manuscripts to Jerome) has ‘condempnat’, as correctly rendered in Tosti’s edition, whereas ‘interimunt’ is erroneously repeated in the quotation attributed to Jerome in the Modena manuscript. This error indicates that the Modena manuscript, the earliest known copy, is probably not Iacobus’ autograph, nor is that version the likely source for the Abridgement.

The second line authored by Iacobus that appears in all three versions of De predicatoribus focuses on doctrina, emphasizing the preacher’s knowledge as the basis for teaching others in matters of ethics, but also noting that such a sermon should be humble and warning against the temptation to preach in a manner that is too fancy or complicated: ‘Secundo debet predicator lucere doctrina, ut sciat quid sit vitandum quidve faciendum et hoc tamen cum humilitate sermonis, et caveat ne curiosa magis sit quam utilis eius doctrina, ut taceat que non debet, et loquatur quod non opportet..’. [‘Secondly, a preacher should shine forth in doctrine so that he knows what should be avoided and what should be done, and yet this [should be done] with humility of the sermon, and let him beware lest his teaching be more curious than useful, so that he remains silent about things he should not, and says what he should not..’.].¹⁷

While Tosti’s edition from the Montecassino manuscript and the version in the Modena manuscript are virtually identical for this passage, the Abridgement interpolates the line ‘nec laudari de sua predicatione ab hominibus desideret’ [‘nor should he desire to be praised by humans for his preaching’] in the middle of this passage, just prior to ‘ut taceat … ’. This is the only mention of this idea in the Abridgement. It is worth noting that the source for the Abridgement’s interpolation in this passage does not seem to be the Modena version, where the closest line reads: ‘Attendat diligenter ne laudem ab hominibus querat’ [‘Let him diligently take care lest he seek the praise of humans’]. Rather, the interpolation seems to be a paraphrase of the following line found only in Tosti’s edition from the Montecassino manuscript: ‘Etiam caveant ne laudari cupiant, nec hominibus plus placere cupiant de sua predicatione quam deo’ [‘Let them beware lest they desire to be praised, nor should they desire to please humans more than God for their preaching’].¹⁸ However, while this evidence (the underscored words and phrase) reinforces the evidence noted above suggesting that the version represented by the Montecassino manuscript was the source for the Abridgement, there is also countervailing evidence suggesting the opposite conclusion, that the version found in the Modena manuscript was the source for the Abridgement, as explained below.

In both the Modena manuscript and Tosti’s edition Iacobus takes this issue much further, not only by marshalling patristic and biblical support, but also by composing dramatic but significantly different lamentations about the prevalence of such preachers:

Modena: … sed hodie ‘conuersa est in luctum cithara domini’, quia predicatores, communiter timore dyaboli abiecto, laudem hominum magis quam domini requirunt … 

[… but today ‘the lyre of the Lord is turned to mourning’ because preachers, commonly casting aside fear of the Devil, seek the praise of humans more than that of the Lord …].

Tosti: Set heu quot sunt qui timore domini abiecto potius requirunt laudem hominum quam divinam.¹⁹

[But alas! How many there are who, casting aside fear of the Lord, seek the praise of humans rather than divine praise!]

The final case of Iacobus’ voice appearing in all three versions is the concluding line to De predicatoribus, yet they vary considerably from one another in echoing his theme:

Modena: Studeamus ergo lucere pariter et ardere.

[Therefore, let us strive to shine and glow equally].

Tosti: Studeamus ergo lucere pariter et ardere, ut per lucem bonorum operum et ardorem conscientie perveniamus ad claritatem eternam etc.²⁰

[Therefore, let us strive to shine and glow equally, so that we may attain eternal glory through the light of good works and the ardor of conscience].

Abridgement: Studeas ergo lucere uita, pariter lucere et ardere per effectum.

[Therefore, strive to shine forth in your life, to shine and glow equally, in effect].

One difference that immediately stands out is the fact that, while the Modena and Montecassino versions employ the plural ‘studeamus’, the Abridgement uses the singular ‘studeas’, so the subjunctive switches from the first-person jussive to the second-person hortatory; thus, the latter (presumably from an unknown editor/scribe) functions more forcefully as a command while the former (from Iacobus himself) reflects a shared vocation by the author and his intended audience, with the understood subject being ‘nos predicatores’. With regards to the relationship between these three versions of Viridarium, the similarity of the short conclusions in the Modena manuscript and the Abridgement strongly suggest that the former version was the source for the latter, which contradicts the evidence noted above which points to the Montecassino version as the source for the Abridgement. Besides the verb forms, the major difference between the concluding lines in the Modena version and the Abridgement is the final ‘per effectum’ in the latter, which is explained by that version’s omission of the preceding quotation from Bernard of Clairvaux, which pairs ‘lucere’ with ‘ardere’ in both the Modena and Montecassino versions, as discussed below. The perfunctory conclusions in the Modena manuscript and the Abridgement clearly lack the rhetorical impact that the version in the Montecassino manuscript provides, which is reminiscent of the conclusion to a homily or sermon with its reference to the goal of eternal glory.²¹ It would be difficult to explain why it would have been shortened in this manner, but easy to understand why it would have been extended if the Montecassino version is indeed the recension of the original Modena version and the latter is the source for the Abridgement. Clearly, a full survey of the extant manuscripts and much more textual analysis needs to be done to untangle the complex manuscript tradition of this influential florilegium. Given the conflicting evidence for whether it was the Modena version or the Montecassino version that was the source for the Abridgement, it may be that yet another version may be found in the manuscript tradition that would resolve the issue.

There are many examples of passages that Iacobus composed himself which appear in the Modena and Montecassino versions but not in the very prolific Abridgement. We have already encountered warnings (caveat/caveant) and injunctions (studeamus), and these terms are used elsewhere in the two longer versions of Viridarium in the lines authored by Iacobus. For example, there is a simple warning against the temptations of the flesh and their negative impact on effective preaching, yet they take different forms:

Modena: Sane atque ne carnaliter actibus incumbat.²²

[And certainly he should not fall into carnal acts].

Tosti: Et caveat ne carnalibus actibus incumbat.²³

[And let him beware lest he fall into carnal acts].

Once again, it makes sense that the Modena version represents Iacobus’ original text and the version in the Montecassino manuscript is a recension, as the ‘caveat’ version is clearly an improvement over the original.

Turning to the injunctions using the verb ‘studere’, in its first usage Iacobus implores the preacher to follow the dictates of conscience, both in living an exemplary life and in persuading others to do the same through that example and through preaching:

Modena: Studeat etiam conscientiam haberem mundam, ut sit igne sanctitatis accensa, et in ea studeat uiriliter. Ibi enim inueniuntur que aliis persuadenda sunt et quomodo.²⁴

[Let him likewise strive to have a pure conscience, so he may be inflamed by the fire of sanctity, and let him strongly study in it. There they will find what they must persuade others to do and how].

Tosti: Studeat etiam conscientiam suam semper tenere mundam, ut igne sancti amoris sit accensa, et illo, scilicet conscientie libro, studeat viriliter. Ibi enim inveniet que sunt aliis persuadenda et que non.²⁵

[Let him likewise always strive to keep his conscience pure, so he may be inflamed by the fire of holy love, and let him strongly study the book of the conscience. There he will find what he must persuade others to do and not to do].

The differences here likewise seem to support the theory that the Modena version was Iacobus’ original text and the version in the Montecassino manuscript is an expanded and improved recension. For example, it appears that ‘suam’ and ‘semper’ were added to the Montecassino version to strengthen the opening clause as it appears in the Modena manuscript. Similarly, ‘et quomodo’ at the end of this passage in the Modena version is less effective than ‘et non’ in the Montecassino manuscript because the latter aligns with similar pairings in this lemma: for example, ‘quid sit vitandum quidve faciendum’. It is interesting, though, to note that both versions use ‘studere’ in both of its primary meanings: to strive and to study.

The other usage of ‘studere’ that is found in the two early versions but not the Abridgement differs from the previous example in employing the plural first-person, as in the concluding line discussed above:

Tosti: Studeamus autem lucere vita pariter et doctrina, nam lucere sola doctrina vanum est, ardere sine vita parum est.²⁶

[But let us [preachers] strive to shine forth equally in both living and teaching, for to shine only in teaching is vain; to glow without living accordingly is inadequate].

Modena: Studeamus igitur lucere uita pariter et doctrina.

[Therefore let us [preachers] strive to shine forth equally in both living and teaching].

This line introduces the quotation from Bernard of Clairvaux mentioned above, which pairs ‘lucere’ and ‘ardere’. Once again, the difference is suggestive of expansion and enhancement in the Montecassino recension. The line in the Modena manuscript, lacking the following line in Tosti’s edition, fails to introduce Bernard’s quotation well, and is also less effective because it is virtually identical to the concluding line of De predicatoribus in that version.

Conclusions

These caveats, exhortations and injunctions, as well as other passages Iacobus authored and included under this lemma along with the cited authoritative quotations, were surely intended to instruct preachers who would be using this Latin florilegium as Iacobus intended: as a reference work for sermon composition. Indeed, the lemma De predicatoribus in Viridarium consolationis reads almost like a brief sermo ad cleros on the vocation of preaching, especially in the Montecassino version with its longer final line. In fact, it would not be surprising to find that Iacobus’ own sentences in this lemma appear in later sermons of that sort, and it is hoped that the editions appended below will enable such discoveries, not only in Latin sermons composed by preachers using Viridarium, but also in vernacular sermons composed by those who employed one of the Romance language translations of Viridarium. They may also appear in examples of ars predicandi literature. If Iacobus’ lines on the reform of preaching were disseminated in such texts, they would almost certainly be attributed not to Iacobus, but rather to one of the authoritative authors he cites for this topic, because most readers of this florilegium would not have expected that the compiler’s own words had been interpolated among passages extracted from the works of those venerable authors, and so would have assumed that his words were part of the preceding quotation.

I pointed out that many of the quotations in Thomas of Ireland’s lemma Predicacio had been significantly altered from the original sources, making the reception of that florilegium in later texts easily discernible.²⁷ The same is true of Iacobus’ De predicatoribus, but not only in terms of the idiosyncratic versions of the transmitted quotations, but also the transmission of words composed by Iacobus de Benevento, either on their own or appended to the preceding quotation attributed to Gregory the Great, Bernard of Clairvaux, or others. For example, both the Modena and Montecassino versions of De predicatoribus include the quotation from Bernard of Clairvaux that is referenced above, which is immediately followed by a line composed by Iacobus that could easily be mistaken as being part of the preceding quotation:

Tosti: Unde Bernardus: ‘Lucere vanum, ardere parum, lucere pariter et ardere perfectum est’. Nam qui scit et debet alios instruere et non instruit, graviter peccat.²⁸

[Thus Bernard: ‘To shine is vain, to burn is inadequate, [but] to shine and burn is perfect’. For he sins grievously who knows and ought to instruct others and does not do so].

Most prominent among the auctores cited by Iacobus under the lemma De predicatoribus are Bernard of Clairvaux, who is cited twice, and especially Gregory the Great, the latter clearly being Iacobus’ favourite authority on this subject, with quotations from Gregory’s Moralia in Iob (4), Pastoral Care (1), Register of Letters (1), Homilies on Ezechiel (1), and Homilies on the Gospels (1).²⁹ Because Iacobus’ own words are so liberally interspersed among those of the authoritative writers he cites, in the context of a florilegium that generally adheres to the expected delivery of a series of authoritative quotations without the interpolated voice of the florilegist, it is possible (but impossible to prove, of course) that Iacobus intentionally appropriated to his own words the authority of Gregory, Bernard and others in order to advocate more effectively for the improvement of pastoral preaching through the moral reform of preachers.

The Editions

Because I have already developed a revised edition of Tosti’s version from the Montecassino manuscript as an open access resource,³⁰ this article provides an edition of the text of De predicatoribus from the Modena manuscript and an edition of this lemma in the Abridgement that is derived from the fourteenth-century copy at Paris and the early fifteenth-century copy at Yale, which together seem to represent that very influential version of the text reasonably well. For the convenience of readers, the lines cited and translated for this article have been underscored in the editions so their contexts can be readily discerned, and so that the few lines authored by Iacobus that are not treated in this article can be easily identified.

De predicatoribus (Modena, Biblioteca Estense Universitaria, MS Lat. 1163, fols 41^vb–43^ra)

Predicatores lux a christo dicuntur,³¹ et quia lucis natura est semper lucere, ideo oportet eos lucere semper, uita scilicet et doctrina, quod si sola doctrina lucent et non uita, gladio increpationis proprie semetipsos interimunt. Ieronimus: ‘Qui male uiuunt et bene predicant, semetipsos interimunt’,³² gladio proprie increpationis condempnant et suam increpationem adhuc contemptibilem reddunt. Gregorius: ‘Cuius uita despicitur, restat ut eius predicatio contempnatur’.³³ Idem ad Corinthios ix: ‘Si enim tuba incertam uocem reddiderit, quis parabit se ad prelium’.³⁴ Tunc tuba, id est uox predicatoris, dat uocem incertam, quando uita discrepat a doctrina, quando bene predicat et male uiuit, quando in se exercet quod in alio reprehendit. ‘Qui predicat non furandum et furatur, non meccandum et meccatur’.³⁵ Vnde apostolus ad Romanos: ‘Quid aliud doces, teipsum non doces. Tales sunt sicut pharisei qui dicunt et non faciunt’,³⁶ sed dominus iustus primo fecit et postea docuit. Illi uero non predicatores, sed predones possunt dici. Gregorius: ‘Possunt predones appellari, qui dum locuntur que non faciunt in locutione uerba iustorum tollunt’.³⁷ Seneca: ‘Orantem te puta, si tibi ipsi quod oportet omnes persuaseris’,³⁸ qui si non fecerit, iure priuaris auctoritate loquendi. Gregorius: ‘Loquendi auctoritas perditur, cum uox opere non iuuatur’.³⁹ Debet predicator, si uult quod eius predicatio audiatur libenter, primo lucere uitam suam orando, dum uiuendo ut possit dici illud psalmiste: ‘Dedi uoci sue uocem uirtutis’,⁴⁰ uirtutis uocem, uoci sue dare est quod dicit uoce opere implere et debet. ‘Illa namque uox facili auditur corda penetrat, quam doctoris uita commendat’.⁴¹ Studeat etiam conscientiam haberem mundam, ut sit igne sanctitatis accensa, et in ea studeat uiriliter. Ibi enim inueniuntur que aliis persuadenda sunt et quomodo. Idem: ‘Ad predicandum plus conscientia sancti amoris quam exercitatio sermonis, quia amando celestia in terra semetipsum legit predicator, quomodo persuadeat ut despici debeant terrena’.⁴² Sane atque ne carnaliter actibus incumbat. Idem: ‘Qui carnalibus actibus incumbit necesse est, ut mentes aliorum instruere spiritualiter erubescat’.⁴³ Secundo debet predicator lucere doctrina, ut sciat docere quid sit uitandum, quidue faciendum. Sed caueat ne sit magis curiosa quam utilis sua doctrina, ut si taceat que non debet, et loquatur quod non oportet, quia tales errantes appellantur. Apostolus prima ad thimotheum 3: ‘Quidam oberrantes conuersi sunt in uaniloquium, uolentes esse legis doctores, et non intelligentes neque que locuntur, neque de quibus affirmant’.⁴⁴ Attendat diligenter ne laudem ab hominibus querat. Quia ut dicit ambrosius: ‘Quisquis predicat ut laudem uel mercedem ab hominibus accipiat, eterna proculdubio mercede se priuat’.⁴⁵ Psalmista: ‘Dominus dissipauit ossa eorum qui hominibus placent, confusi sunt quoniam deus spreuit eos’.⁴⁶ Apostolus: ‘Si adhuc hominibus placerem, christi seruus non essem’.⁴⁷ Ideo ad Thessalonicenses: ‘Et ita loquimur: Non quasi hominibus placentes, sed deo qui probat corda nostra’.⁴⁸ Debet etiam quilibet dicere illud psalmiste: ‘In deo laudabo uerbum, in domino laudabo sermonem’.⁴⁹ Nam qui sic non faciunt, adulterant uerbum dei, ut dicit apostolus: ‘Non sumus sicut plurimi adulterantes uerbum dei’.⁵⁰ Vbi dicit Gregorius: ‘Adulter quippe in carnali coitu non prolem, sed uoluptatem querit. Et peruersus quippe quisquis ac uana glorie seruiens recte adulterare uerbum dei dicitur, quia per sacrum eloquium non ideo filios gignere, sed suam scientiam desiderat ostendere, quem quia libido inanis glorie trahit, uolunptatis magis generationi opera impedit’,⁵¹ sed hodie ‘conuersa est in luctum cithara domini’,⁵² quia predicatores, communiter timore dyaboli abiecto, laudem hominum magis quam domini requirunt, de quibus recte dicitur per prohetam: ‘Effraim pascit uentum, et sequitur estum’.⁵³ Vere tales faciunt de medicina uenenum et de uirtute uitium; ueritatem in mendacium et sapientiam in stultitiam uertunt. Gregorius: ‘Sperne cum laudaueris, ipse in te laudetur qui in te operatur’.⁵⁴ Nam de saluatore nostro dicitur: ‘Ego gloriam meam non quero’.⁵⁵ ‘Iustus, cum laudatur in facie, flagellatur in corde’.⁵⁶ Studeamus igitur lucere uita pariter et doctrina, quia ut dicit Bernardus: ‘Lucere uanum, ardere parum, lucere et ardere perfectum est’.⁵⁷ Nam qui scit et debet alios instruere, etsi non instruit, grauiter peccat. Gregorius: ‘Sunt itaque nonnulli qui magnis muneribus ditati, dum solius contemplationis studiis inardescunt, parere utilitati proximorum refugiunt, secretum quietis diligunt, successum speculationis appetunt, de quo districte iudicentur, ex tantis proculdubio rei sunt, quantis uehementes ad publicum proficere uoluerunt. Quia enim mente his qui proximus prodesse non potest. Secretum proponit suum, quando ipse summi patris egressus ad publicum nostrum’.⁵⁸ Studeamus ergo lucere pariter et ardere.

De predicatoribus (P = Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, MS Lat. 3511, fols 26^v–27^r and Y = New Haven, Yale University, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, MS 880, fol. 51^r–v).

Predicatores lux a saluatore nostro dicuntur. Ait enim in euangelio Mathei: Vos estis lux mundi. Vnde quia de natura lucis sunt, semper⁵⁹ lucere oportet. Debet predicator lucere, uita scilicet⁶⁰ et doctrina, quia si sola doctrina luxerit⁶¹ absque uita, seipsum gladio proprie increpationis condempnat. Gregorius: ‘Cuius uita despicitur, restat ut eius predicatio contempnatur’. Item: ‘Possunt predones appellari, qui dum loquuntur quod faciunt in locutione uerba iustorum tollunt’. Sed debet lucere doctrina, ut sciat docere quid sit uitandum, quid ue faciendum, et hoc cum humilitate sermonis. Et caueat ne curiosa sit magis quam utilis sua doctrina⁶², nec⁶³ laudari de sua predicatione ab hominibus⁶⁴ desideret, quia tales adulterari uerbum dei ab apostolo dicuntur. Ait enim: ‘Non sumus sicut plures adulterantes uerbum dei’. Gregorius super isto uerbo adulterantes: ‘Adulterium quippe in carnali coitu non prolem, sed uoluptatem⁶⁵ querit, et prauus quisque ac⁶⁶ uane glorie seruiens, iure adulterans⁶⁷ uerbum dei dicitur. Quia per sacrum uerbum⁶⁸ non deo filios gignere⁶⁹, sed suam scientiam desiderat ostendere, quem quia libido glorie ad loquendum trahit, uoluptati⁷⁰ magis quam operationi operam impendit’. Studeas ergo lucere uita, pariter lucere⁷¹ et ardere per effectum.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Chris L. Nighman

Chris L. Nighman ([email protected]) is a Professor of History at Wilfrid Laurier University and a Status-only Faculty Member of the Centre for Medieval Studies at the University of Toronto.

Notes

1 I presented a version of this paper in May 2023 at York University for the annual conference of the Canadian Society of Medievalists/Société canadienne des médiévistes.

2 Chris L. Nighman, ‘Commonplaces on Preaching Among Commonplaces for Preaching? The Topic Predicacio in Thomas of Ireland’s Manipulus florum’, Medieval Sermon Studies, 49 (2005), 37–57. This article was an early product of my development of an open access critical edition of Manipulus florum, completed in 2013; see the Electronic Manipulus florum Project: http://www.manipulusflorum.com [accessed 21 September 2023].

3 The Italian version was edited by Francesco Tassi in Della miseria dell’uomo, Giardino di consolazione, Introduzione alle virtù, di Bono Giamboni (Firenze: Guglielmo Piatti, 1836), pp. 161–227. For the Castilian version, see Tractado de viçios e virtudes: an Edition, ed. by Cleveland Johnson, Scripta Humanistica, 104 (Potomac, Maryland: Scripta Humanistica, 1993). The Portuguese version was edited by Albino de Bem Veiga in Virgeu de Consolaçon (Porto Alegre: Livraria do Globo, 1959), pp. 3–126. Finally, there is also a Waldensian version in the Vaudois dialect; see Il Vergier de Cunsollacion e altri scritti: manoscritto Ge 209, ed. by Annabella Degan Checchini (Torino: Claudiana, 1979), pp. 151–83. None of these editors attempted to identify the original sources for the quotations compiled into this florilegium, except Checchini, who references only the biblical quotations.

4 ‘Viridarium consolationis’, ed. by Luigi Tosti, Bibliotheca Casinensis, iv (1880), 263–315.

5 Johnson points out that the attribution to Iacobus de Benevento in the Modena manuscript had been previously noted by Giuglio Bertoni in ‘Nota sul volgarizzamento del Viridarium Consolationis’, Giornale Storico della Letteratura Italiana, 58 (1911), 271–72. See Tractado de viçios e virtudes, ed. by Johnson, p. 30.

6 In addition to Johnson, Bem Veiga, and Checchini, see André Derville, ‘Jacques de Bénévent’, in Dictionnaire de spiritualité: ascétique et mystique, doctrine et histoire, 17 vols (Paris: Beauchesne, 1932–95), viii (1974), cols 30–31; Incipits of Latin Works on the Virtues and Vices, ed. by Morton Bloomfield et al. (Cambridge, Mass.: Medieval Academy of America, 1979), p. 434 (#5058); and Lucia Castaldi, ‘Iacobus de Benevento OP’, in Compendium Auctorum Latinorum Medii Aevi (500–1500), 7 vols (Florence: SISMEL, 2000–), vi.5 (2020), 549–50.

7 Tommaso Kaeppeli, ‘Iacopo da Benevento O.P.’, Archivio italiano per la storia della pietà, 1 (1951), 463–79; Tommaso Kaeppeli, Scriptores Ordinis Praedicatorum Medii Aevi, 4 vols (Rome: Typis Polyglottis Vaticanis – Istituto Storico Domenicano, 1970–93), ii (1975), 304–09.

8 There are actually 89 lemmata listed in the Montecassino manuscript following the preface and preceding the first lemma, reproduced in Tosti’s edition on pp. 263–64, but two of the listed topics (4.2 De patiencia and 5.11 De doctoribus sacre scripure) are missing from the edition and presumably from the Montecassino manuscript. My online edition supplies the text for those two lemmata from the Modena manuscript.

9 Mary Rouse and Richard Rouse, Preachers, Florilegia and Sermons: Studies on the ‘Manipulus florum’ of Thomas of Ireland, PIMS Texts and Studies, 47 (Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Mediaeval Studies, 1979).

10 Thomas Falmagne, Un texte en contexte: Les ‘Flores Paradisi’ et le milieu culturel de Villers-en-Brabant dans la première moitié du 13^e siècle, Instrumenta Patristica et Mediaevalia, 39 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2001).

11 The lemma that lies among these three reform-oriented topics is De clericis nostri temporis (5.10), which contains only a single line authored by Iacobus, following the definition of clericus and preceding six quotations attributed to Bernard of Clairvaux: ‘Sed heu! quam pauci reperiunt qui sint tales sicut esse debent’ [But alas! how few are to be found who are such as they should be!] (‘Viridarium consolationis’, ed. by Tosti, 307^b).

12 The other manuscript that attributes Viridarium to Iacobus de Benevento is a fifteenth-century copy: Besançon, Bibliothèque Municipale, MS 139, fols 20^r–40^r. The only other attributed copy is a fragment of the text at Prague; see below, note 13.

13 Bologna, Collegio di Spagna, MS 138, fol. 51^ra–rb; Mainz, Wissenschaftliche Stadtbibliothek, MSS I 102, fol. 94^va–vb; I 146, fol. 37^v; I 184, fols 146^v–147^r; New Haven, Yale University, Beinecke Rare Book and Manuscript Library, MS 880, fol. 51^r–v; Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale de France, MS Lat. 3511, fols 26^v–27^r; Prague, Národní knihovna, MSS X.A.13, fol. 99^va and XIII.G.18, fol. 143^v. Three other copies in Prague do not include Pars V and therefore lack the lemma De predicatoribus: Prague, Národní knihovna, MSS VIII.E.21, fols 141^r–153^r, which is attributed to Rolandus de Comitibus; XII.E.10, fols 58^r–80^r; XIII.G.11, fols 51^v–69^v.

14 See Tractado de viçios e virtudes, ed. by Johnson, pp. 170–71; and Della miseria dell’uomo, Giardino di consolazione, ed. by Tassi, pp. 222–23. The longer Portuguese version and the shorter Vaudois version were both surely derived independently from the version preserved in the Montecassino manuscript, as they both share unique aspects of that text in Tosti’s edition that are not found in the Modena manuscript or the highly abridged version; see Virgeu de Consolaçon, ed. by De Bem Veiga, pp. 115–17; and Il Vergier de Cunsollacion e altri scritti: manoscritto Ge 209, ed. by Checchini, p. 172. For example, ‘De li predicatores’ in the Vaudois translation Vergier includes a translation of the following line authored by Iacobus that is found only in Tosti’s edition (p. 308^b): ‘Tunc tuba, idest vox predicatoris, dat incertam vocem, quando vita discrepat a doctrina, scilicet, quando bene predicat et male vivit, et quod in alio reprehendit ipse agit’ [‘A trumpet, namely the voice of the preacher, makes an uncertain sound when life conflicts with teaching, when he preaches well but lives in an evil way, and he does himself what he admonishes in another’].

15 ‘Vnde magno desiderio laboraui istud opusculum compilando ad laudem dei et utilitatem omnium, et specialiter illorum qui aliis habent proponere uerbum dei’ (Modena, Modena, Biblioteca Estense Universitaria, MS Lat. 1163, fol. 1^ra; cf. ‘Viridarium consolationis’, ed. by Tosti, 263^b).

16 ‘Viridarium consolationis’, ed. by Tosti, 308^b.

17 ‘Viridarium consolationis’, ed. by Tosti, 309^a.

18 ‘Viridarium consolationis’, ed. by Tosti, 309^a.

19 ‘Viridarium consolationis’, ed. by Tosti, 309^b.

20 ‘Viridarium consolationis’, ed. by Tosti, 309^b.

21 Given the adjective eternam, I have chosen to translate claritatem as ‘glory’, according to a usage in ecclesiastical Latin, rather than the secular/classical sense of ‘fame’ or ‘renown’.

22 Carnaliter is presumably another scribal error in the Modena manuscript, further evidence that it is not Iacobus’ autograph copy.

23 ‘Viridarium consolationis’, ed. by Tosti, 309^a.

24 Inueniuntur instead of inuenitur is surely another another scribal error in the Modena manuscript, as the verbs in the preceding sentence are consistently singular.

25 ‘Viridarium consolationis’, ed. by Tosti, 308^b–9^a.

26 ‘Viridarium consolationis’, ed. by Tosti, 309^b.

27 Nighman, Commonplaces, 44.

28 ‘Viridarium consolationis’, ed. by Tosti, 309^b. This passage in the Modena manuscript is virtually identical.

29 Note that the second quotation from Gregory’s homilies on the Gospels is misattributed to Ambrose in both the Modena and Montecassino versions. Also, Gregory is miscited twice, once for a line from Augustine and once for a line from an unknown source which is likewise misattributed to Gregory in Guillelmus Autissiodorensis’ Summa aurea.

30 The Digital Viridarium consolationis Project, ed. by Chris L. Nighman (2023) https://viridarium-project.wlu.ca/index.html [accessed 21 September 2023]. The development of this online resource was supported by an Insight Grant awarded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada.

31 cf. Matthew 5. 14.

32 cf. Radulfus Ardens, Speculum uniuersale, 9.37, ed. by C. Heimann and S. Ernst, Corpus christianorum, Continuatio mediaevalis, 241A (Turnhout: Brepols, 2020), p. 420, ll. 1761–62.

33 Gregorius Magnus, Homiliae in euangelia, 12.1.1, ed. by R. Étaix, Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, 141 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1999), p. 82, ll. 31–37.

34 1 Corinthians 14. 8.

35 Romans 2. 21–22; cf. Radulfus Ardens, Speculum uniuersale, 9.37, ed. by C. Heimann & S. Ernst, CCCM, 241A (Turnhout: Brepols, 2020), p. 420, ll.1759–1760.

36 Romans 2. 21.

37 Gregorius Magnus, Moralia in Iob, 11.2, ed. by M. Adriaen, Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, 143A (Turnhout: Brepols, 1979), p. 587, ll. 51–53. Iacobus’ intermediate source is likely the Glossa ordinaria for Job 12. 6 (Abundant tabernacula praedonum); see Biblia Latina cum glossa ordinaria (Strassburg: A. Rusch, 1480–81), n.p.

38 Martinus Bracarensis, Libellus de moribus, 1, in Patrologiae cursus completus: Series Latina, ed. by Jacques-Paul Migne, 221 vols (Paris: Migne, 1844–64), lxxii, col. 29B.

39 Gregorius Magnus, Moralia in Iob, 19.7, ed. by Adriaen, p. 965, ll. 10–12.

40 Psalms 67. 34.

41 Gregorius Magnus, Registrum epistularum, 1.24, ed. by D. Norberg, Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, 140 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1982), p. 23, ll. 60–63.

42 Gregorius Magnus, Homiliae in Hiezechielem prophetam, 1.10.13, ed. by M. Adriaen, Corpus Christianorum, Series Latina, 142 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1971), p. 150, ll. 191–94.

43 Gregorius Magnus, Moralia in Iob, 7.36, ed. by Adriaen, p. 377, ll. 16–19.

44 1 Timothy 1. 6–7.

45 Gregorius Magnus, Homiliae in euangelia, 1.17.7, ed. by Étaix, pp. 121–22, ll. 130–32.

46 Psalms 52. 6.

47 Galatians 1. 10.

48 1 Thessalonians 2. 4.

49 Psalm 55. 11.

50 2 Corinthians 2. 17.

51 Gregorius Magnus, Moralia in Iob, 16.60, ed. by Adriaen, p. 842, ll. 7–12.

52 Job 30. 31. This quotation is not included in Tosti’s edition, and is presumably absent from the Montecassino manuscript.

53 Hosea 12. 1.

54 Augustinus Hipponensis, In epistolam Johannis ad Parthos tractatus, 8.2, in Patrologiae cursus completus: Series Latina, ed. by Jacques-Paul Migne, 221 vols (Paris: Migne, 1844–64), xxxv, col. 2036.

55 John 8. 50.

56 Pseudo-Chrysostom, Opus imperfectum in Matthaeum, 27, in Patrologiae cursus completus: Series Graeca, ed. by Jacques-Paul Migne, 161 vols (Paris: Migne, 1857–66), lvi, col. 773. This quotation is not included in Tosti’s edition, and is presumably absent from the Montecassino manuscript.

57 Bernardus Claraeuallensis, Sermo in natiuitate sancti Ioannis Baptistae, 3, ed. by J. Leclercq, C.H. Talbot, H.M. Rochais, Sancti Bernardi Opera (Rome: Editiones Cistercienses, 1957–77), v (1968), 178, ll. 1–2.

58 Gregorius Magnus, Regula pastoralis, 1.5, ed. by F. Rommel, Sources Chrétiennes, 381 (Paris: Le Cerf, 1992), p. 148, ll. 47–56.

59 semper] eos add. P

60 scilicet] pariter P

61 luxerit] uixerit P

62 sua doctrina] doctrina sua P

63 nec] ne Y

64 hominibus] omnibus Y

65 uoluptatem] uoluntatem Y

66 ac] et P

67 iure adulterans] uite adulteri P

68 uerbum] om. Y

69 gignere] gignit P

70 uoluptati] uoluntati Y

71 lucere] et luce P