67.hammond02

Dating Bonaventure's Inception as Regent Master

Jay M. Hammond

Franciscan Studies, Volume 67, 2009, pp. 179-226 (Article)

Published by Franciscan Institute PublicationsDOI: 10.1353/frc.0.0041

For additional information about this article

Access Provided by State Library in Aarhus at 06/20/12 8:56PM GMT

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/frc/summary/v067/67.hammond02.html

http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/frc/summary/v067/67.hammond02.html

Franciscan Studies 67 (2009)179

Dating Bonaventure’s inception as regent Master

In light of the careful work of Joshua Benson who argues that the De reductione is the second part to Bonaventure’s inception sermon,1 this article will date the De reductione by determining when he incepted.2 This is not an easy task be-cause the date of his inception has been a point of confusion within Bonaventurian scholarship. Scholars date it as early as 1248 and as late as 1257. Within those nine years they as-sign various scenarios regarding his status as regent master. For example, the most common scenario has Bonaventure in-cepting in 1253 or 1254 and assuming the Franciscan Chair in theology, but only teaching in the Franciscan convent, un-recognized by the university until either 1256 or 1257.3

My thesis is that Bonaventure incepted in April 1254 to replace William of Middleton who relinquished the Francis-can chair in the wake of the Lenten riot of 1253.4 To argue this thesis, the paper divides into three parts. The first will brief-ly present the various dating for Bonaventure’s inception. The second will examine all the thirteenth and fourteenth

1 Published in this volume, Joshua Benson, “Identifying the Literary Genre of the De reductione artium ad theologiam: Bonaventure’s Inaugu-ral Lecture at Paris,” Franciscan Studies 66 (2008): 149-78. I would like to thank both Joshua Benson and James Ginther for the many conversations regarding Bonaventure’s chronology during his academic career at Paris.

2 The critical edition for the De reductione artium ad theologiam is: S. Bonaventurae opera theologica selecta, vol. 5, Cura PP. Collegii S. Bona-venturae (Florence: Ad Claras Aquas, 1934), 215-28.

3 The next issue of Franciscan Studies will contain my essay, “Dating Bonaventure’s Recognition as Regent Master,” which argues the seculars accepted him into the consortium magistrorum at the time he incepted in 1254.

4 By arguing this thesis, I intend to correct my previous dating of the De reductione in the entry for Bonaventure in the New Catholic Encyclo-pedia, second edition, vol. 2 (Detroit: Gale, 2003), 483b: “Considering the related issue of the self-sufficiency of Aristotelianism, it is also likely that [Bonaventure] wrote at this time (1269-70?) On the Reduction of the Arts to Theology, a mature and compact expression of his synthesis of retracing all knowledge and philosophy to a Christian wisdom-theology based on Scripture. However, a precise date for this text remains elusive, and some scholars date it around 1256.”

Jay M. HaMMond180

century sources that are used for determining Bonaventure’s chronology so as to establish the evidence for calculating his inception. And third, building upon the evidence gleaned from those witnesses, I will present a narrative chronology that details events surrounding Bonaventure’s inception in April 1254.

i. various Dating of Bonaventure’s inception as Master

Scholars assign various dates to his inception, which has caused much confusion. The Quaracchi editors of the Op-era omnia, Robinson, Gilson, Moorman, and Crowley claim Bonaventure incepted in 1248;5 Robson alone gives a 1252 date;6 Callebaut, Longpré, the Spanish editors of the Obras de San Buenaventura, Abate, Bonafede, the earlier Brady, the later Hayes, and Hammond give a date of 1253;7 Pelster, Glorieux, the Quaracchi editors of the Opera theologica se-lecta, Veuthey, the earlier Bougerol, Cousins, Schlosser and

5 S. Bonaventurae opera omnia, vol. 10 (Quaracchi: Collegii S. Bona-venturae, 1902), 42-43; Paschal Robinson, “Bonaventure, St.” The Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 2 (New York: Robert Appleton Company, 1907), 649a; Etienne Gilson, The Philosophy of St. Bonaventure (New York: Sheed and Ward, 1938), 10; John Moorman, A History of the Franciscan Order: From Its Origins to the Year 1517 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968), 140; Theodore Crowley, “St. Bonaventure Chronology Reappraisal,” Franziskanische Stu-dien 56 (1974): 318, 320, 322.

6 Michael Robson, “Saint Bonaventure,” in The Medieval Theologians, edited by G. R. Evans (Oxford: Blackwell, 2001), 187.

7 André Callebaut, “L’entrée de S. Bonaventure dans l’Ordre des Frè-res Mineurs 1243,” La France franciscaine 4 (1921): 44-45, 47; Ephrem Longpré, “Bonaventure, Saint,” Dictionnaire de spiritualité, vol. 1 (Paris: Beauchesne, 1937), c. 1768; Obras de San Buenaventura, vol. 1 (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1945), 9; Giuseppe Abate, “Per la storia e la cronologia di S. Bonaventura, O. Min. (c. 1217-1274),” Miscellanea Fran-cescana 50 (1950): 97-111; Giulio Bonafede, San Bonaventura (Benevento: Cenacolo Bonaventuriano, 1961), 6; Ignatius Brady, “Bonaventure, St.,” New Catholic Encyclopedia, vol. 2 (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967), 658b; Zachary Hayes, Bonaventure: Mystical Writings (New York: Crossroad, 1999), 16; Jay Hammond, “Bonaventure, St.,” New Catholic Encyclopedia, 479b.

Dating Bonaventure’s inception as regent Master 181

Delio opt for 1253 or 1254;8 the later Bougerol, Quinn, the earlier Hayes, Noone, Hauser, and Cullen hold for a 1254 date;9 the later Brady posits a 1255 date;10 Bettoni and Du-feil push the inception back to 1257.11 Table 1 highlights the disparity between the last two studies that focus specifically on Bonaventure’s chronology during his time at Paris.

Table 1: Disputed dates in Bonaventure’s Chronology12

Key Dates Quinn (1972) Crowley (1974)Born 1217 1221

Studied Arts 1235-1243 1234-38*

8 Franz Pelster, “Literargeschichtliche Probleme im Anschluß an die Bonaventuraausgabe von Quaracchi,” Zeitschrift für katholische Theolo-gie 48 (1924): 524-30; Palémon Glorieux, “D’Alexandre de Halès à Pierre Auriol: La suite des maîtres franciscains de Paris au XIIIe siècle,” Archi-vum Franciscanum Historicum 26 (1933): 265-75, 280-81; S. Bonaventu-rae opera theologica selecta, vol. 5 (Quaracchi, 1934), vii-ix; Léon Veuthey, “Bonaventura, S.,” Enciclopedia filosofica, vol. 1 (Rome: Istituto per la Col-laborazione Culturale, 1957), 745a; Jacques Guy Bougerol, Introduction à l’étude de saint Bonaventure (Tournai: Desclée, 1961), 13; Ewert Cousins, Bonaventure and the Coincidence of Opposites (Chicago: Franciscan He-rald Press, 1978), 35, and Bonaventure, in The Classics of Western Spiritu-ality (New York: Paulist Press, 1978), 7; Marianne Schlosser, Bonaventura begegnen (Augsburg: Sankt-Ulrich-Verlag, 2000), 5; and Ilia Delio, Simply Bonaventure: An Introduction to His Life, Thought and Writings (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 2001), 22.

9 Jacques Guy Bougerol, Introduction à Saint Bonaventure, second edi-tion (Paris: J. Vrin, 1988), 5; John Quinn, “Chronology of St. Bonaventure (1217-1257),” Franciscan Studies 32 (1972): 180-81, 186, and “Bonaventure, St.,” in Dictionary of the Middle Ages, vol. 2, ed. Joseph Strayer (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1983), 313; Zachary Hayes, “Bonaventure: Mys-tery of the Triune God,” in The History of Franciscan Theology, ed. Kenan Osborne (St. Bonaventure: Franciscan Institute, 1994), 40; Timothy Noone and Rollen Houser, “Saint Bonaventure,” Stanford Encyclopedia of Phi-losophy (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/bonaventure, 2005); Christopher Cullen, Bonaventure (New York: Oxford University Press, 2006), 11.

10 Ignatius Brady, “The Writings of Saint Bonaventure Regarding the Franciscan Order,” in San Bonaventura Maestro di Vita Francescana e di Sapienza Cristiana, vol. 1, ed. Alfonso Pompei (Rome: San Bonaventura, 1976), 91.

11 Efrem Bettoni, S. Bonaventura (Brescia: La Scuola, 1945), 9; Michel-Marie Dufeil, Guillaume de Saint-Amour et la Polémique Universitaire Pa-risienne, 1250-1259 (Paris: Éditions A. et J. Picard, 1972), 158.

12 Quinn, “Chronology,” 186 and “Chronology,” 322. An asterisk signals where I infer dates from those Crowley provides.

Jay M. HaMMond182

Baccalarius theologiae 1243-1253 1238-1245*Entered Order 1244 1238Licensed as Master 1254 1245Incepted 1254 1248Elected General Minister 1257 1257

At least the two studies have one date in common, and with that one fixed date of 1257, we turn to examine the thir-teenth and fourteenth century witnesses so as to dispel the disparity.

ii. exaMining the sources

Even though the dating for Bonaventure’s inception spans nine years, there are only seven sources that scholars can use to calculate those dates. More specifically, the majority of scholars support a 1253 or 1254 dating, with the year dis-crepancy likely deriving from how they calculate the dates in the sources according to medieval/modern calendars.13 Thus, to sort through the tangle of dating, all the evidence will first be presented in full. Then, in light of all the evidence, a sce-nario for dating Bonaventure’s inception can be advanced.

The thirteenth and fourteenth century sources fall into four groups:14 (1) the Chronica fratris Salimbene de Adam (c. 1283);15 (2) the two independent, short lists of General

13 For explanation of the different medieval calendars, see C. R. Cheney and Michael Jones, A Handbook of Dates for Students of British History, New Edition (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2000), 4-5; also see Adriano Cappelli, Cronologia, cronografia e calendario perpetuo: Tavole cronografiche e quadri sinottici per verificare le date storiche dal principio dell’Era Cristiana ai giorni nostri (Milan: Ulrico Hoepli, 1960), 8-11.

14 For a brief description of each of the sources see, Moorman, History, 292-94, and Bert Roest, Reading the Book of History: Intellectual Contexts and Educational Functions of Franciscan Historiography, 1226 - c. 1350 (Groningen: Regenboog, 1996), 36-39.

15 Chronica fratris Salimbene de Adam, edited by Giuseppe Scalia, Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Mediaevalis 125, I-II (Turnhout: Bre-


Ministers: Series Magistrorum Generalium Ordinis Frat-rum Minorum (c. 1261-64),16 and Chronicon Abbreviatum de Successione Generalium Ministrorum (c. 1304);17 (3) the three interdependent texts of the Catalogus Generalium Ministrorum,18 Catalogus XV Generalium (c. 1304; also called Catalogus Gonsalvinus),19 and the Chronica XXIV Generali-um (c. 1360; also called Chronica Generalum Ministrorum),20 which contain significant variances from one another; and (4) the Chronica Franciscis Fabrianensis (c. 1322; also called Chronica Veneta).21 As will become clear, scholars who ad-vance a 1248 date read Salimbene in light of Fabriano, while those who favor 1253 or 1254 read Salimbene in light of the Catalogus Generalium Ministrorum and related texts. Those who favor a 1257 dating, seem to ignore all these sources, and instead look to the Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis for evidence regarding when Bonaventure became a recog-nized regent master, which exceeds the scope of this paper.22

A. The Chronica fratris Salimbene de Adam (c. 1283)

Salimbene’s witness provides four pieces of evidence.

[John of Parma] hastened the end of the last general chapter that he presided over, because he no longer wished, by any means, to remain Minister General. This chapter was held in Rome, during the feast of the Purification in the year of the Lord 1257. And the

pols, 1998) hereafter abbreviated CCCM. English translation, The Chroni-cle of Salimbene de Adam, ed. Joseph Baird, et al. (New York: Medieval and Renaissance Texts and Studies, 1986).

16 Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptorum, 13, 392. Hereafter abbreviated MGH.

17 Tractatus Thomae Vulgo Dicti de Eccleston, De Adventu Fratrum Minorum in Angliam, ed. Andrew Little, in Collection d’études et de docu-ments sur l’histoire religieuse et littéraire du Moyen Âge, 7 (Paris: Fischba-cher, 1909).

18 MGH, Scriptorum, 32, 664-65.19 Analecta franciscana 3 (1897), 693-707.20 Analecta franciscana 3 (1897), 1-575.21 Giacinto Pagnani, “Frammenti della Cronaca del B. Francesco Ve-

nimbeni da Fabriano,” Archivum Franciscanum Historicum 52 (1959): 153-77.

22 See footnote 3.

Jay M. HaMMond184

business of the chapter was completely stalled for one whole day because the Ministers, the Custodians, and the Delegates did not want to allow him to step down from his Office. Finally, Brother John went into the chapter meeting and made known his full desire ac-cording to his understanding of the situation. Then seeing the anguish of his spirit, those whose duty it was to see to elections, said to him, though against their will, “Father, you have traveled throughout the Order and you know the ways of all the Brothers very well indeed; therefore, you select a suitable Brother to succeed you.” And immediately he selected Brother Bonaventure of Bagnoregio, saying that he knew not a better man in the entire Order. And they all im-mediately agreed, and Bonaventure was elected. But they asked Brother John to continue to preside over this his last chapter, and it was so done. And Brother Bonaventure ruled for seventeen years and did many good works.23

1. The date of Bonaventure’s election as general minister: 2 February 1257

Salimbene’s witness is explicit: Bonaventure was elected in 1257 on the feast of the Purification (2 February). Nota bene, Salimbene’s dating follows the mode of the Nativity ac-

23 Chronica fratris Salimbene de Adam, in CCCM 125, 473: Ultimum generale capitulum quod sub eo [John of Parma] celebratum fuit accelera-vit, quia penitus nolebat esse minister; et factum est Rome, in festo Purifica-tionis, anno Domini MCCLVII. Et steterunt per unum diem ministri et cus-todes et discreti, quod in negotiis capituli processum non est, quia penitus nolebant ipsum absolvere. Tunc ingressus locum capituli protulit verba sua secundum quod scivit et voluit dicere. Tunc hi quibus electio incumbebat, videntes angustiam anime eius, quamvis male libenter, dixerunt ei: “Pater, vos, qui visitastis Ordinem et cognoscitis mores et conditiones fratrum, as-signetis nobis unum ydoneum fratrem, quem constituamus super hoc opus, et vobis succedat. Et statim assignavit fratrem Bonaventuram de Bagno-reto et dixit quod in Ordine meliorem eo non cognoscebat. Et statim omnes consenserunt in eum, et fuit electus. Et rogaverunt fratrem Iohannem quod compleret capitulum. Et factum est ita. Et prefuit frater Bonaventura XVII annis et multa bona fecit. English translation, The Chronicle of Salimbene de Adam, ed. Joseph Baird, et al., 309.


cording to the Pisan calendar (25 December – 24 December), which basically corresponds with the modern calendar.24

2. The length of Bonaventure’s tenure as general minister: 17 years

Salimbene’s interval of seventeen years coordinates with Bonaventure’s election (1257) and death at the Council of Lyon (15 July 1274). Thus, the three dates of election, tenure, and death all triangulate.

3. The date John of Parma licensed Bonaventure: 1248

Brother John of Parma also gave Bonaventure of Ba-gnoreggio a license so that he could lecture at Paris, because he had never done it anywhere since he was a bachelor without a chair. And then, he gave a lecture on St. Luke’s entire gospel, which is beautiful and best. And he wrote four books on the Sentences, which are useful and solemn up to the present day. Then it was the year 1248. Now, however, it is the year of the Lord 1284. Over time, he also wrote many other books, which are owned by many.25

In 1248 John of Parma licensed Bonaventure to lecture at Paris when he was only a bachelor and before he had a chair. The Quaracchi editors of the Opera omnia and Crowley claim that at this time Bonaventure must have been a formed bachelor (baccalareus formatus) because it would make no sense to say the Bonaventure was a mere bachelor without

24 Quinn, Chronology, 174-76.25 Chronica fratris Salimbene de Adam, in CCCM 125, 458: Item frater

Iohannes de Parma dedit licentiam fratri Bonaventure de Balneo Regis ut Parisius legeret; quod nunquam alicubi fecerat, quia bacellarius erat nec adhuc cathedratus. Et tunc fecit lecturam super totum Evangelium Luce, qua pulchra et optima est. Et super Sententias IIII libros fecit, qui usque in hodiernum diem utiles et sollemnes habentur. Currebat tunc annus mil-lesimus CCXLVIII. Nunc autem agitur annus Domini MCCLXXXIIII. Fecit etiam processu temporis et alios multos libros, qui habentur a multis. En-glish translation, The Chronicle of Salimbene de Adam, ed. Joseph Baird, et al., 299.

Jay M. HaMMond186

a chair, which is obvious: an auditor theologiae would never hold a chair. However, there is another scenario that is not “void of all meaning” (omni sensu caret).26

Salimbene’s comment suggests that what John of Parma did was out of the ordinary, that is, Bonaventure was given permission to lecture within the Franciscan convent even though he was not a master. Considering the circumstances of the context, the comment makes a great deal of sense. As Dufeil shows, the Franciscans at Paris maintained one pub-lic, external chair and one private, internal chair within the Franciscan studium, which the university did not officially recognize.27 Thus, in 1248 when Odo Rigaud leaves the public chair at Paris to become the archbishop of Rouen, William of Middleton steps up from the private chair to replace him as regent master, and John of Parma appoints Bonaventure, who was not yet a master, to lecture from the private chair. Such a scenario, which accounts for the organizational struc-ture of the Franciscan studium, rejects the necessity for an early inception in 1248.

4. Bonaventure’s scholastic activities c. 1248.

After being licensed, the record reports that Bonaventure then (ex tunc) lectured on the entire Gospel of St. Luke and (et) wrote his Sentences.28 Later university statutes claim that a bachelor was to lecture on Scripture for two years followed by two more years on the Sentences,29 but caution must be taken when applying statutes from 1335 and 1366 to explain

26 Opera omnia, vol. 10, 42-43; Crowley, “Chronology Reappraisal,” 318.

27 Dufeil, Guillaume de Saint-Amour, 6-9; Bert Roest, A History of Franciscan Education, 14, claims that the Franciscans had acting co-re-gent masters (magisteri in actibus) in the Franciscan studium.

28 Quinn, “Chronology,” 177, argues that the date of 1248 applies to when Bonaventure commenced the Commentary on Luke and cannot be used to determine when he started on the Sentences. However, the two Catalogi and the Chronica report that Bonaventure began the Sentences in 1251. See footnote 74 and related text.

29 Chartularium Universitatis Parisiensis II, edited by Heinrich De-nifle (Brussels: Culture et Civilisation, 1964), n. 1188.11, 692. Hereafter all references to the Chartularium are abbreviated CUP.


the practice of 1248: 87 to 118 years earlier.30 Nevertheless, it is important to note two points. First, by the 1240s it be-came standard practice for a Parisian baccalarius theologiae to lecture on Scripture and the Sentences.31 Second, nothing in Salimbene’s mentioning of Bonaventure’s Luke commen-tary and four books on the Sentences conflicts with either the trends of the 1240s or with the later legislation of the 14th century. So if the later legislation represents an ear-lier tradition, a rather precise timeframe for Bonaventure’s studies can be determined: at least two years for the bac-calarius biblicus, 1248-1250, followed by at least two years as baccalarius sententarius, 1250-1252.32 However, as will be shown,33 Bonaventure most likely lectured on Scripture for three years and the Sentences for two years. Ultimately, the precise sequential timeframe of Bonaventure’s studies takes back seat to the more relevant fact that he had six years to complete his lectures on Scripture and the Sentences, which

30 For descriptions of theological studies according to the later sta-tues, see Palémon Glorieux, “L’Enseignement au Moyen Âge: Techniques et méthodes en usage à la faculté de théologie de Paris au XIIIe siècle,” Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du moyen âge 43 (1968): 65-186; for more concise reviews, see Gordon Leff, Paris and Oxford Universities in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Centuries (New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1968), 164-71, especially 166, and Rashdall, The Universities of Europe, 474-79.

31 Roest, A History of Franciscan Education, 123, comments that lec-tures on Scripture and the Sentences were formalized by c. 1250 in the Franciscan studium at Paris. Later he writes, “By 1240, the Sentence com-mentary had established itself firmly in the Parisian theology faculty as a major element of higher theological education” (125). On this point, also see Marie-Dominique Chenu, “Maîtres et bacheliers de l’université de Pa-ris vers 1240,” Études d’histoire littéraire et doctrinale du XIIIe siècle 1 (1932): 11-39.

32 As discussed below (see footnote 107 and related text), such a dating coordinates with Dufeil’s claim, Guillaume de Saint-Amour, 157-58, that the secular masters issued Quoniam in promotione to block Bonaventure’s reception into the consortium. Again caution is in order. According to Olga Weijers, Terminologie des universités au XIIIe siècle (Rome: Edizioni del-l’Ateneo, 1987), 175-76, no 13th century university sources make the 14th century threefold distinction for the bachelor: baccalarius biblicus, senten-tiarius and formatus. For a description of the degree program in the 13th century at Paris, see Roest, A History of Franciscan Education, 97-101; however, Roest bases much of his analysis on later legislation.

33 See footnote 74 and related text.

Jay M. HaMMond188

is enough time for him to complete his studies before he re-placed William of Middleton in 1254.34

A final point, Crowley also argues that a “mere baccalarius biblicus” could not have produced the Commentary on Luke.35 Such a comment overlooks one fact, glosses over another, and errs on a third. First, Crowley assumes that Bonaventure was a baccalarius who read as a cursus, restricted to giving only a cursory reading of the text.36 However, Bonaventure proba-bly served as a lector biblicus.37 In the mendicant schools, the lector was in charge of the studium within the convent, and he was often studying theology at the same time he served as lector.38 This is precisely how the position and role of the lector evolved within the Franciscan Order.39 Significantly, the manifesto Excelsi dextra (1254) testifies to the position of the lectores among the regulars: “We therefore … decided to decree that no convent of the regulars in our college should have two, solemn chairs with acting regent masters teaching simultaneously, not meaning by this statute to prevent the friars from multiplying their own extraordinary lecturers as they might see fit.”40 The evidence suggests that when John

34 See footnote 127 and related text. Since the two Catalogi and the Chronica report that Bonaventure read the Sentences in 1251, it is plau-sible that Bonaventure lectured on Scripture for three years not two. Of course not all his time had to be dedicated to the Luke Commentary. He may have also worked on his Commentarius in librum Sapientiae during the time. The Commentarius in librum Ecclesiastes and the Commentarius in Evangelium Ioannis both contain determinations, which indicate that he delivered those lectures as a master sometime after 1254.

35 Crowley, “Chronology,” 320, assumes that Salimbene’s words qua pulcra et optima est “seem better suited to the masterpiece of medieval exegesis in 1248, Commentarius in Evangelium S. Lucae, begun, at least, by Bonaventure in 1248, at the start of his career as Magister Regens …”

36 It is interesting that Crowley utilizes the same categories that he had just rejected, i.e., baccalarius biblicus, sententiarius and formatus.

37 Weijers, Terminologie, 160-63; also see Mariken Teeuwen, The Vo-cabulary of the Intellectual Life in the Middle Ages (Turnhout: Brepols, 2003), 85-87.

38 Weijers, Terminologie, 160-61. 39 Hilarin Felder, Geschichte der wissenschaftlichen Studien im Franzi-

skanerorden bis um die Mitte des 13. Jahrhunderts (Freiburg im Breisgau: Herder, 1904), 325, 367, 373; and Roest, A History of Franciscan Education, 81-97, especially 96, 100, and 105.

40 CUP I, n. 230, 254: Nos igitur…prehabita duximus statuendum ut nullus regularium conventus in collegio nostro duas simul sollempnes ca-


of Parma licensed Bonaventure to lecture in 1248, he was not licensing him as a baccalarius biblicus, but as a lector biblicus who was above a cursus but below a magister.41 In effect, he granted Bonaventure the license as a bachelor so that he could lecture from the internal chair as William of Middleton’s assistant. In this capacity, Bonaventure would have been responsible for the non-degree lectorate program within the Franciscan studium at Paris,42 which constituted the majority of Franciscan students.43

Second, Crowley dismisses the fact that the Commen-tary on Luke does not determine, which was the privilege of a master.44 Rather than address this significant omission in the text, he simply rebuffs the suggestion that a non-master Bonaventure wrote the commentary by saying such a claim conflicts with the Quaracchi editors. He adds, “The Commen-tary in its present state is undoubtedly the work of a master and not a beginner.”45 But, as suggested, John did not license Bonaventure as a cursus or even as an apprentice lecturer (sublectores), but as a lector biblicus or lector extraordinarius or secundarius whose task it was to explore and elucidate the spiritual senses of Scripture.46

Third, Crowley asks, “Is the Commentary in its present state a re-working of a Bachelor’s lectures? If it is, it is so skillfully done and so thorough that it defies detection. I can find no signs of re-vamping.”47 However, manuscripts of the

thedras habere valeat actu regentium magistrorum, non intendentes per hoc statutum eos arctare quominus liceat eis inter fraters suos extraordi-narios multiplicare sibi lectores, secundum quod sibi viderint expedire. For explanation of extraordinarius see Weijers, Terminologie, 306-10.

41 If the Epistola de sandaliis apostolorum (Opera omnia, vol. 8, 386a) is authentically Bonaventure’s, as Conrad Harkins argues (“John Pecham and the Mendicant Controversy of the Thirteenth Century,” Doctoral Dis-sertation, University of Toronto, 1973, 143-50), then we have at least one instance where Bonaventure called himself lector. The letter opens: Talis lector tali lectori spiritum intelligentiae sanioris.

42 Roest, A History of Franciscan Education, 81-97.43 Roest, A History of Franciscan Education, 17 and 97.44 Franz Pelster, “Literargeschichtliche,” 523.45 Crowley, “Chronology,” 320.46 Weijers, Terminologie, 306-10; Roest, A History of Franciscan Edu-

cation, 92.47 Crowley, “Chronology,” 320.

Jay M. HaMMond190

Luke Commentary actually preserve two forms of the text, which provides direct evidence that the commentary un-derwent stages of redaction: a later form represented in the Quaracchi edition and an earlier form corresponding more to the lectures of a bachelor.48 Thus, the lectures Bonaven-ture began in 1248 represent the earliest layer of the Luke Commentary and are most likely not the polished text that Salimbene praised as pulchra et optima.49

B. The Series Magistrorum Generalium Ordinis Fratrum Minorum (c. 1261-64)

This list provides one piece of evidence, the date of Bo-naventure’s election as general minister: 1257

Brother Crescentius took office in the year 1244 and served for three and a half years, being released from office in 1248. Brother John of Parma succeeded him. Brother John of Parma took office in the year 1248 and served for ten years. He was released from office in 1258 and was succeeded by Bonaventure. Brother Bonaventure took office in the year 1258, being elected as general in chapter on the Feast of the Purification (2 February). He is the seventh general minister.50

48 Bougerol, Introduction (1988), 179, also assumes that Bonaventure was a baccalarius biblicus. The earlier form is not simply a “cursory rea-ding” of Luke, the later form accentuates the forma praedicandi.

49 Dominic Monti, “Bonaventure’s Interpretation of Scripture in His Exegetical Works,” Doctoral Dissertation, University of Chicago, 1979, ar-gues for three stages of redaction after 1248: (1) 1254-1257 as regent mas-ter lecturing at Paris (154), 1260s as General Minister engaging Aristotle’s thought (54, n. 2), and (3) 1267-1268 as General Minister preaching the Sunday Sermons (155, n. 1). The redaction process would make Crowley’s claim that a “mere bachelor” did not deliver the Commentary on Luke cor-rect, but this fact would not support his interpretation of Bonaventure’s dating; rather it adds more evidence against it.

50 MGH, Scriptorum, 13, 392: Frater Crescencius cepit anno Domini 1244, et prefuit annis 3 et dimidium, et absolutus est anno Domini 1248, et ei successit frater Iohannes de Parma. Frater Iohannes de Parma cepit anno Domini 1248, et prefuit annis 10, et absolutus est anno Domini 1258, et ei successit Bonaventura. Frater Bonaventura cepit anno Domini 1258. Hic est septimus minister generalis par generale 25 capitulum electus in festo purificationis. English translation, Francis of Assisi: Early Documents, vol.


The fact that the title reads “magistrorum” rather than “ministrorum” probably indicates a non-Franciscan author, which may help explain the incorrect dating of when Cre-sentius left office (1247 not 1248),51 and when John of Parma was elected (again 1247 not 1248).52 That miscalculation re-sults in Bonaventure being elected in 1258 not 1257.53 Yet the mention of his election on the Feast of the Purification (2 February) provides another witness that corroborates with other sources.

C. The Chronicon Abbreviatum de Successione Generalium Ministrorum (c. 1304)

This chronicle provides two pieces of evidence. After [John of Parma] was released from office, Bother Bonaventure of Bagnoregio was elected at the same chapter as the ninth general.54 He was a great doctor

3: The Prophet, ed. Regis Armstrong, J.A.Wayne Hellmann and William Short (New York: New City Press, 2001), 825.

51 The incorrect dating may also derive from the Chronica fratris Jordani, 76, which dates John of Parma’s election to 1248, but this same source correctly dates the chapter of Rome to 1257, on the feast of the Pu-rification. For the text, see Heinrich Boehmer, Chronica Fratris Jordani. Collection d’études et de documents sur l’histoire littéraire du moyen âge, 6 (Paris: Librairie Fischbacher, 1908), and Leonhard Lemmens, “Continuatio et finis chronicae fratris Jordani de Jano,” Archivum Franciscanum Histo-ricum 3 (1910): 47-54. English translation, XIIIth Century Chronicles, ed. Placid Hermann (Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1961), 69.

52 For the correct date of John of Parma’s election, see Chronica fratris Salimbene de Adam, in CCCM 125, 473. English translation, The Chro-nicle of Salimbene de Adam, ed. Joseph Baird, 309. Also see Moorman, History, 589.

53 Since this source dates from c. 1261-1264 (marginal notes in the manuscript date it to the pontificate of Urban IV), it would be odd for a Franciscan source to miscalculate Bonaventure’s election date during his reign as minister.

54 Most of the other sources name Bonaventure as the seventh Mi-nister General after Francis or as the eighth General when Francis is in-cluded in the list. This is the only witness that claims he was the ninth. To arrive at nine, Peregrine of Bologna must have included Peter Catani (vicar until 1221), whom Francis appointed after he abdicated in 1220, and Elias, whom Francis appointed after Peter’s death in 1221, in the count of ministers after Francis. In such a scenario, Elias is counted twice (vicar 1221-27 and general minister 1232-39).

Jay M. HaMMond192

of theology and known by all. He held office for about sixteen years, and, having been made a Cardinal, was poisoned by a certain religious.55 As a consequence of this poison, he passed to the Lord.56

1. The date of Bonaventure’s election as general minister: 1257

On the one hand, this witness confirms that Bonaventure was elected at the same chapter that John of Parma was re-moved from office, which provides indirect support for a 2 February 1257 date.


On the other hand, the witness also claims that Bonaven-ture “held office for about sixteen years,” which places his death in 1273, one year short of Bonaventure’s death on July 15, 1274. The Chronicle of the XXIV Generals corrects Per-egrine’s witness: “But the more common opinion holds that he ruled for 18 years or thereabout, because more than sev-enteen years were completed, in as much as it is from the Purification of Saint Mary up to Pentecost.”57

55 This is the only source that mentions poisoning as the cause of Bo-naventure’s death. Interestingly, while The Chronicle XXIV Generals cer-tainly knew this source, the authors did not comment on this intriguing detail.

56 Tractatus Thomae Vulgo Dicti de Eccleston, De Adventu Fratrum Minorum in Angliam, ed. Andrew Little, in Collection d’etudes et de docu-ments sur l’histoire religieuse et littéraire du Moyen Age, 7 (Paris: Fisch-bacher, 1909), 144: Post eius absolutionem in eodem capitulo fuit electus nonus generalis frater Bonaventura de Balneoregio, et fuit magnus doctor in theologia, ut omnibus notum est. Qui stetit in officio fere per XVI annos, et, factus cardinalis, potionatus fuit a quodam religioso, de qua potione migravit ad dominum. English translation FA:ED 3, 829.



D. The Catalogus Generalium Ministrorum (c. 1304), Catalogus XIV vel XV Generalium (c. 1304), and Chronica XXIV Generalium (c. 1360)

These three interrelated sources provide seven pieces of evidence. What follows is a compilation of the three sources. Bolded italic text represents variants from the two earlier Catalogi, the italicized text shows variants from the later Chronica, and the plain text is common to both. To allow for parallel comparison, Table 2 below presents the Latin from the three texts, which report:

The most illustrious father, brother Bonaventure of Bagnoregio of the Province of Rome was the sev-enth to follow after St. Francis. [He] was made the eighth General, elected in the aforementioned chapter of Rome in the year after the incarnation of the Lord 1256, during the celebration of the Purification of Saint Mary. The lord Pope Alexander IV was present. When the General entered the Order as a youth, he was so endowed with the honor of good character, that the great master Alexander himself sometimes said that in him it seemed that Adam had not sinned … It is a fact that in the seventh year after entering the Order he lectured on the Sentences at Paris, and in the tenth he received a magisterial chair, and in the twelfth or thirteenth he assumed control of the Order. He governed the Order for eighteen years, and in Lyon at the time of the general council, he died a cardinal at the age of 53, the bishop of Albano. Brother Bonaventure, before he was General, while he held the chair at Paris, defended the true gospel with the clearest disputations and determinations. The General brother Bonaventure, according to the chroni-cle of brother Peregrine of Bononia, ruled the Order for 16 years. But the more common opinion holds that he ruled for 18 years or thereabouts, because more than seventeen years were completed, in as much as it is from the Purification of Saint Mary up to Pentecost. When this brother [Bonaventure] was assumed to the cardinalate and at the time of the chap-

Jay M. HaMMond194

ter during the general council of Lyon in 1274, the aforementioned brother Jerome was elected General minister, who was absent because he had not yet returned from being a legate.

Table 2: Comparison of the two earlier Catalogues and the later Chronicle

Catalogue of the General Ministers

Catalogue of the 14 or 15 Generals

Chronicle of the 24 Generals

Septimus a beato Francisco successit praeclarissimus pater frater Bonaventura de Balneoregio.

Septimus a beato Francisco successit praeclarissimus pater frater Bonaventura de Balneoregio.

Octavus Generalis fuit praeclarissimus pater frater Bonaven-tura de Balneregio Provinciae Romanae, electus in praedicto capitulo Romae anno ab incarnatione Do-mini MCCLVI, in festo Purificationis bea-tae Mariae celebrato, domino Alexandro Papa IV praesente …

Qui cum iuvenis in-trasset ordinem, tanta bone indolis honestate pollebat, ut magnus ille magister frater Alexander diceret ali-quando de ipso, quod in eo videbatur Adam non peccasse …

Qui cum iuvenis intrasset Ordinem, tanta bonae indolis honestate pollebat, ut magnus ille magister Alexander diceret ali-quando de ipso, quod in eo videbatur Adam non peccasse ...

Qui Generalis, cum iuvenis intrasset Ordinem, tanta bonae indolis honestate pollebat, ut magnus ille magister Alexan-der de Alis disceret aliquando de ipso, quod videbatur Adam in eo non peccasse …

Hinc factum est, ut in septimo anno post ingressum ordinis Sententias Parisius legeret et in decimo reciperet cathedram magistralem, et in XII vel XIII ad regimen Ordinis est assump-tus.

Hinc factum est, ut in septimo anno post ingressum Ordinis Sententias legeret Parisius et in decimo reciperet cathedram magistralem et in XII vel XIII ad regimen Ordinis est assump-tus.

Hinc factum est, ut in VII anno post ingres-sum Ordinis Senten-tias Parisius legeret et in X reciperet cathe-dram magistralem; in XII vero vel XIII ad regimen Ordinis est assumptus …


Decem et octo annis rexit Ordinem et in Lugduno tempore generalis concilii obiit cardinalis anno etatis suae LIII, episcopus scilicet Albanensis.

Decem et octo annis rexit Ordinem et in Lugduno tempore generalis concilii obiit Cardinalis, anno aetatis suae LIII, episcopus scilicet Albanensis …

Hic Generalis frater Bonaventura secun-dum chronicam fratris Peregrini de Bononia rexit Ordinem XVI annis vel circa. Sed communior opinio te-net, quod rexit XVIII annis vel circa, quia XVII annis completis et ultra, qantum est a Purificatione beatae Mariae usque ad Pen-tecosten.62

Hic antequam esset minister, dum teneret Parisius cathedram, veritatem evan-gelicam clarissimis disputationibus et determinationibus defensavit.58

Hic antequam esset Minister, dum teneret Parisius cathedram, veritatem evan-gelicam clarissimis disputationibus et determinationibus defensavit.60

Iste frater Bonaven-tura, antequam esset Generalis, dum teneret Parisius cathedram, veritatem evangelicam claris-simis disputationibus et determinationibus defensavit.63

Hoc patre ad cardi-nalatum assumpto et tempore concilii generali capitulo Lugduni congregato 1274, frater Ieronimus predictus absens, quia nondum a legatione redierat, in generalem ministrum ellectus est…59

Hoc fratre ad cardi-nalatum assumpto et tempore concilii generalis capitulo Lugduni congregato 1274, frater Hierony-mus praedictus abs-ens, quia nondum a legatione redierat, in Generalem Ministrum ellectus est.61

58 MGH, Scriptorum 32, 664-65.59 MGH, Scriptorum 32, 666.60 Analecta franciscana 3 (1897):600.61 Analecta franciscana 3 (1897): 701.62 Analecta franciscana 3 (1897): 354.63 Analecta franciscana 3 (1897): 323-26.

Jay M. HaMMond196

1. Bonaventure’s place in the succession of general ministers: 7th or 8th

The discrepancy between the two earlier Catalogi and the later Chronica is easily explained. The former identify Bonaventure as the seventh Minister General after Francis while the latter includes Francis in the list, which makes Bonaventure the eighth General Minister.

2. The year Bonaventure was elected general minister: 2 February 1257

Of the three sources, only the Chronica provides an ex-plicit date for Bonaventure’s election, 1256 on the feast of Mary’s Purification (2 February); but the two Catalogi pro-vide indirect evidence because both mention that Bonaven-ture ruled for eighteen years (i.e., 1256-1274).64 Nota bene, all three witnesses follow the mode of the Incarnation ac-cording to the Florentine calendar (25 March to 24 March), which corresponds to 1257 on a modern calendar.65 Moreover, all three sources recognize the variance between the Pisan and Florentine calendars when they report that Bonaven-ture was elected in the twelfth or thirteenth year after join-ing the Order: according to the Florentine calendar, he was elected in the twelfth year, but, according to the Pisan cal-endar, he was elected in the thirteenth year. This vital point is highlighted by the fact that the Chronicle of the XXIV Generals, in correcting the dating of Peregrine of Bologna’s Chronica,66claims Bonaventure ruled for eighteen years if one calculates according to the Florentine mode, but only seventeen years according to the Pisan mode. The year of Bo-naventure’s election is most important because only by iden-tifying this date can the other calculations from these three sources be determined.

3. The year Bonaventure entered the Order: 1244

Much of the confusion over when Bonaventure entered the Order derives from the “dual dating” contained in these three sources. Table 3 illustrates the problem.


Table 3: Possible dates derived from the “dual dating” of twelve or thirteen years

12 years 13 years

1256 1244 1243

1257 1245 1244

Unfortunately, modern studies have advanced all three dates as possibilities (1243-1245).67

Since the previous section established 1257 as the date of Bonaventure’s election, all three witnesses, calculated ac-cording to the Florentine calendar, produce a date of 1243, which corresponds to 1244 in the modern mode.68 The dual dating actually corroborates a 1244 date because, as Table 3 shows, only 1244 can accommodate a twelve or thirteen year calculation.69 Determining the correct date for Bonaven-ture’s entry into the Order is most crucial because all three sources calculate other key events post ingressum ordinis. They all also mention that Bonaventure entered the Order as an iuvenis.70 The evidence suggests that Bonaventure was twenty-three at the time he entered the Order or twenty-two if one includes his one year novitiate. Since Francis Fabriano reports that Bonaventure completed his Arts degree before

67 For example, Callebaut, “L’entrée de S. Bonaventure,” 42, and Abate, “Per la storia e la cronologia,” 100, give 1243, while Pelster, “Literarge-schichtliche,” 517, has 1244 or 1245. Later studies fare no better, Brady, “Bonaventure, St.,” 658b, and Hammond, “Bonaventure, St.,” 479a, both have 1243, but Quinn, “Chronology,” 186, gives 1244. The dating is com-plicated even more by the fact that Crowley, “Chronology,” 322, holds for a 1238 dating.

68 See footnote 65 and related text; also see Quinn, “Chronology,” 176.69 Quinn, “Chronology,” 176.70 Crowley, “Chronology,” 311-13, belabors the point that Bonaventure

was a youth (iuvenis) even though he admits that it is an elastic term ap-plying to anyone over 15 and under 40. If Bonaventure was 23 when he entered the Order, that age certainly qualifies for the name iuvenis. Accor-ding to Roest, A History of Franciscan Education, 91, a student beginning his theological studies at Paris would have been around 21 to 23 years old. The Constitutions of Narbonne list 18 as the normal cut-off for entry into the Order, allowing for those 15 and older in extraordinary cases (Opera omnia, vol. 8, 450b).

Jay M. HaMMond198

joining the Order,71 Bonaventure, if he followed the Univer-sity statutes,72 likely began studying the Arts in 1235 and must have been at least twenty in 1241.73 Such a chronology coordinates with when Bonaventure became a novice and then professed: born 1221, studies Arts 1235-1241, lectures on the Arts 1241-1243, novitiate 1243, and profession 1244.

4. The year Bonaventure read the Sentences: 1251

All three sources report that in the seventh year Bona-venture read the Sentences at Paris. Thus, if he entered the Order in 1244, Bonaventure read the Sentences in 1251. There is no mention of a timeframe, so more specificity is not possible. However, a 1251 date can coordinate with Salim-bene and allows Bonaventure time to complete the Senten-ces before 1254.74 Thus, he most likely lectured on Scripture for three years (1248-1251) and the Sentences for two years (1252-1253).

5. The year Bonaventure received his magisterial chair: 1254

All three sources forthrightly report that Bonaventure became a master and received a chair at Paris in 1254. Corroborating evidence comes from the Chronica’s report of John of Parma’s activities in 1254. Therein, the witness records: “In the year of our Lord 1254 … also at the time brother Bonaventure of Bagnoregio, the strongest defender of truth for the mendicant religion, gained the magisterial

71 See footnote 90 and related text.72 CUP I, n. 20, 78. Robert Curzon’s statute from 1215 states three

things: (1) a student must be an auditor for six years, (2) he must lecture for two years, and (3) he must be at least twenty to lecture. Thus, the Arts degree lasted for eight years.

73 CUP I, n. 20, 78 reads, “No one may lecture in the arts at Paris befo-re his twenty-first year” (Nullus legat Parisius de artibus citra vicesimum primum aetatis suae annum), meaning that the lecturer has to be at least twenty. On this point see, Rashdall, The Universities of Europe, 462, n. 4.



chair at Paris. Also in the year 1254 …”75 The date of 1254 reveals two things. First, since the Chronica follows the Flo-rentine mode,76 the inception had to have occurred after 25 March.77 Second, it is clear that the witness means 1254 in the modern mode because the occurrence of “Eodem anno MCCLIIII” records the death of Innocent IV and the elec-tion of Alexander IV in December 1254. In effect, the witness sandwiches the inception between two other 1254 events that can be externally verified. Therefore, the inception occurred sometime after 25 March of 1254, probably around Easter, which was on 12 April.

6. Bonaventure’s age when he died: 53; born 1221

Significantly the first two Catalogi state that Bonaven-ture died at the age of 53, but the later Chronica omits this important detail. The omission is all the more obvious when one considers that the Chronica incorporates, virtually ver-batim, all the data from the earlier two sources. Why the omission? Abate may provide an answer. He argues that Bo-naventure had to be at least 40 in 1257 because the Consti-tutiones Urbanae (1628), following the earlier tradition, sti-pulate that a general minister had to be over 40 and under 70.78 Yet, the omission suggests that by c. 1360 generals had to be 40, but c. 1304 it was not yet a regulation. Thus, the Chronica removes the data that conflicts with the current practice at the time the Chronica was written. The fact that Bonaventure did not have to be 40 is supported by the simple fact that John of Parma was only 38 or 39 when elected.79

Hence, Abate’s evidence for a 1217 date for Bonaventure’s birth, actually supports a 1221 date, which does not require

75 Analecta franciscana 3 (1897), 277-78: Anno vero Domini MCCLIV… Eodem tempore frater Bonaventura de Balneregio, pro Religiosis Mendi-cantibus defensor fortissimus veritatis, Parisius assecutus est cathedram Magistralem. Eodem anno MCCLIIII …

76 See footnote 65 and related text.77 Quinn, “Chronology,” 186, n. 44.

Jay M. HaMMond200

the age of Bonaventure’s death to be changed from LIII to LVI to make the dates coordinate.80

Abate also argues that Bonaventure had to be at least 35 at the time of his inception to fulfill the 1215 statute of Ro-bert Curzon.81 This would require Bonaventure to be born in 1219. However, considering the circumstances surrounding Bonaventure’s inception as master, it is not unreasonable to suppose that the University faculty chose not to enforce the statute so Bonaventure could incept at thirty-three. With this rather small allowance, they would gain a great deal: removal of William and any Franciscan claim to two chairs. Moreover, it is clear that Thomas Aquinas incepted two years later even though he was not 35.82 Hence, it is not “morally certain that St. Bonaventure was born no later than 1217” because the evidence supports a 1221 dating.83

7. The length of Bonaventure’s tenure as general min-ister: 18 years

All three sources report that Bonaventure served as ge-neral for eighteen years. The Chronica, clarifies the date ac-cording to the Florentine mode of the Incarnation: “But the more common opinion holds that he ruled for 18 years or the-reabout, because more than seventeen years were completed, in as much as it is from the Purification of Saint Mary up to Pentecost.”84 Since the Florentine calendar changed years on 25 March, Bonaventure served for 18 years (2 Feb 1257 to 15 July 1274) because seventeen years plus the time between 2 February to 25 March makes eighteen years, which is the point the Chronica tries to clarify.

80 Abate, “Per la storia e la cronologia,” 107, n. 1, changes the date to make his chronology synchronize.

81 CUP I, n. 20, 79.82 CUP I, n. 270, 307. Jean-Pierre Torrell, Saint Thomas Aquinas, vol.

I (Washington D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1996), 50-51, comments that Thomas “was only thirty-one or thirty-two …”

83 Quinn, “Chronology,” 173. In light of the evidence, I must again cor-rect my own earlier dating in the New Catholic Encyclopedia, Second Edi-tion (2002), 479a, which gives a 1217 date.



E. The Chronica Franciscis Fabrianensis (c. 1322)

This chronicle provides five pieces of evidence.

The seventh General Minister after the death of our Saint Francis was Brother Bonaventure of Bagnoreg-gio, a man of good memory, holy and just, and righ-teous and God fearing, completed (consummatus) the arts among the Parisians, and made (effectus) mas-ter in sacred theology after entering himself into the Order, licensed (licentiatus) under master Alexander, first master of the Order, whom, when in time, all the University of Paris followed, under whom seven of our brothers were licensed and made (effecti) Masters in sacred theology.

Now it is said that Bonaventure was a most elo-quent man, with an exceptional understanding of sa-cred Scripture and all of theology, a beautiful homilist to clerics and preacher to the people, in whose pres-ence every language of every land was silent. He was made general minister 33 years after Saint Francis. He was general for 15 years and, while remaining general, was made Cardinal by the lord Pope Gregory X at the council of Lyon.85

85 Fabriano Ms. 117, 50v. Giacinto Pagnani, “Frammenti della Crona-ca del B. Francesco Venimbeni da Fabriano,” Archivum Franciscanum His-toricum 52 (1959): 172, cited below as “P” and Crowley, “Chronology,” 317, cited below as “C”: Septimus Generalis Minister post transitum beati Patris nostri Francisci fuit frater Bonaventura de Bagnoleo, vir bonae memoriae [P comma; C no comma] sanctus et iustus, et rectus ac timens Deum [P com-ma; C no comma] consummatus in artibus apud Parisios et post ingressum ipsius in Ordnem Magister effectus [C comma; P no comma] in sacra The-ologia [P comma; C no comma] Licentiatus sub Magistro Alexandro, primo Magistro Ordinis, quem cum esset in saeculo tota Parisiensis Universitas sequebatur, sub quo septem Fratres nostri fuerunt licentiate et Magistri ef-fecti in sacra Theologia.

Hic iam dictus frater Bonaventura vir eloquentissimus fuit, mirabi-lis intellectu sacrae Scripturae et totius sacrae theologiae, pulcherrimus sermocinator ad clerum et praedicator ad populum, in cuius praesentia ubique terrarium omnis lingua silebat. Hic factus est generalis Minister xxxiij anno a transitu beati Francisci. Hic stetit Generalis xv annis et, ex-istens Generalis, factus fuit Cardinalis a domino papa Gregorio decimo in concilio Lu[g]dunensi.

Jay M. HaMMond202

1. Bonaventure’s place in the succession of general ministers: 7th

Like the two Catalogi, Fabriano does not include Francis when calculating Bonaventure’s number as general minister. He is the seventh after Francis.

2. The date of Bonaventure’s election as general minister: 1259

This is the first signal that Francis Fabriano’s Chronica may be an untrustworthy witness.86 He reports that Bona-venture became general minister thirty-three years after Saint Francis, and served as general for 15 years. The num-bers add up, but provide the wrong date for Bonaventure’s election because, although Fabriano correctly identifies Fran-cis’s death on 4 October 1226,87 the thirty-three year inter-val dates his election to 1259. The mistake is compounded by the fact that the fifteen year interval of service coincides with the date of Bonaventure’s death in 1274. Nota bene, Fa-briano miscalculates by three years according to the Floren-tine calendar and two years according to the Pisan calendar, neither of which can be “fixed” by alternative dating via diffe-rent modes of medieval calendars. All the other sources give 1257 for Bonaventure’s election. This witness alone gives a 1259 date.88 Thus, Francis Fabriano’s evidence regarding Bonaventure’s election date should be rejected.

86 Nowhere does Crowley, “Chronology,” acknowledge the error, likely because it undermines Francis Fabriano as a reliable witness, and since Crowley builds his entire argument upon it, if it is untenable, so too is Crowley’s interpretation.

87 Pagnani, “Frammenti della Cronaca,” 169.88 It is particularly odd that Crowley, who depends so heavily of Fran-

cis’s report, claims that Bonaventure, with “absolute certainty,” was elec-ted in 1257 (“Chronology,” 310, 322). He simply ignores the errors of his favored witness.


3. The sequence of Bonaventure’s studies: completed arts, entered Order, became master

I keep the Latin in the above translation to highlight how it conveys the flow of Bonaventure’s studies: consummatus in the arts before entering the Order, effectus as master after he entered, and licentiatus by Alexander. The flow is impor-tant because Crowley argues that a comma should be pla-ced after magister effectus instead of in sacra Theologia so as to read the text as meaning Bonaventure became a mas-ter of the Arts rather than a master of sacred theology. He asserts, “When placed after the word effectus, the text loses its slovenly, unrhythmical appearance; it acquires balance, becomes natural and respectful of orderly sequence.”89 I beg to differ. Note the alternative readings:

Crowley: consummatus in artibus apud Parisios et post ingressum ipsius in Ordnem Magister effectus, in sacra Theo-logia Licentiatus sub Magistro Alexandro.90

Pagnani: consummatus in artibus apud Parisios et post ingressum ipsius in Ordnem Magister effectus in sacra Theo-logia, Licentiatus sub Magistro Alexandro.91

The first has consummatus and effectus within the same clause and ignores the conceptual break of et post. In effect, Crowley argues that the text only reports two events: one involving the arts, the other involving licensing. The second separates into three clauses by recognizing the division of et post. Here the text reports three events: consummatus arts, effectus master, and licentiatus Alexander.92 The three past participles neatly structure the sentence and provide an or-derly sequence. Moreover, the comma placement after sacra Theologia becomes even more obvious when one notices the exact same construction just a few lines down, sub quo sep-

89 Crowley, “Chronology,” 314-15.90 Crowley, “Chronology,” 317.91 Pagnani, “Frammenti della Cronaca,” 172.92 For consideration of licentiatus as technical term referring to “a

licensed student or scholar,” see Teeuwen, Vocabulary, 91.

Jay M. HaMMond204

tem Fratres nostri fuerunt licentiate et Magistri effecti in sa-cra Theologia. Even though Crowley cites the expanded text five times in his footnotes, he ignores this second occurrence of Magistri effecti when constructing his argument.93

Even more problematic is that Crowley, like Abate, alters dates to synchronize Francis Fabriano with the two Catalogi and the Chronica . Following the Quaracchi editors,94 he “sol-ves” the “major difficulty” by inserting a V into XII or XIII, which he claims should actually read XVII or XVIII.95 Without any evidence whatsoever, Crowley adds five years to make his chronology compatible. He concedes, “it seems to be the only way to reconcile the data at our disposal.”96 But in fact, there is an easier explanation: the witness is wrong. Thus, little trustworthy evidence can be gleaned from the Chronica Franciscis Fabrianensis (c. 1322). It does add a corroborating witness that Bonaventure was the seventh general minister after Francis, the plausible claim that he finished his Arts studies before entering the Order, and the basic fact that he became a master in theology; but the remaining evidence can not sequence with the other 13th and 14th century witnes-ses. Thus, it should be judged inaccurate, and Crowley’s in-terpretation of it discarded.97

4. The date Alexander of Hales licensed Bonaventure: 1245 or earlier

Since Alexander of Hales died on 21 August 1245, he would have had to license Bonaventure before this date. Sin-ce Fabriano mentions seven other brothers who were licen-sed and made masters in sacred theology under Alexander, it

93 Crowley, “Chronology,” 314-15.94 Opera omnia, vol. 10, 47-48.95 Crowley, “Chronology,” 321-22.96 Crowley, “Chronology,” 322.97 This is particularly unfortunate considering other scholars cons-

truct their arguments upon the foundation of Crowley’s chronology. For example, Michael Cusato, “‘Esse ergo mitem et humilem corde, hoc est esse vere fratrem minorum’: Bonaventure of Bagnoregio and the Reformulation of the Franciscan Charism,” in Charisma und religiöse Gemeinschaften im Mittelalter, ed. Giancarlo Andenna, Mirko Breitenstein and Gert Melville (Münster: LIT, 2005), 343-82, especially 356ff.


is safe to assume the same applies to Bonaventure, i.e., the testimony refers to his terminal licensing and not an earlier, intermediate one, e.g., as a bachelor. However, this is in direct contradiction with Salimbene who reports that Bonaventure was still a bachelor in 1248,98 and the Catalogi/Chronica that state 1254 for Bonaventure’s inception. Given the other problems with Fabriano’s witness, the other sources, which do not conflict with each other, seem to be more reliable. Bo-naventure undoubtedly studied under Alexander, but he was not licensed by him in the capacity Fabriano indicates.


Fabriano is the only witness to claim Bonaventure served as general for fifteen years. As mentioned above,99 it seems that he may have determined this increment to coincide with Bonaventure’s death in 1274. Regardless of the reason, the dating is wrong and cannot be corrected by appeal to diffe-ring medieval calendar calculations. Thus, this piece of evi-dence should also be rejected.

suMMary of part i

These seven sources provide the following pieces of evi-dence:

1221 Bonaventure’s birth1235-41 Studies the Arts at 141241-43 Lectures on the Arts as a bachelor at 201243 Master of Arts, enters novitiate; begins status

as auditor theologiae100 at 23

98 See footnote 25 and related text.99 See footnote 86 and related text.100 CUP I, n. 20, 80, stipulates that a student had to be an auditor

for five years; thus, if Bonaventure began his theology studies in 1243, he would have completed the requirement before he was licensed by John of Parma in 1248. However, the later legislation from Narbonne 1.8 prohibits a novice from studies during the whole time of their probation. Thus, even though it is not entirely clear whether Bonaventure became an auditor in

Jay M. HaMMond206

1244 Profession, officially enters the Order at 241248 Licensed lector biblicus by John of Parma at

27 1248-51 Baccalarius biblicus1252-53 Baccalarius sententiarius1253 Baccalarius formatus1254 Incepts as master to replace William of Mid-

dleton at 331257 Elected General Minister at 35 (36 if born be-

fore 2 February)

iii. Bonaventure’s chronology, 1221-1254

Having established the evidence in the previous section, the analysis now turns to provide a narrative treatment of Bonaventure’s chronology. Bonaventure began his study of the Arts in 1235. Following normal university procedure, he was an auditor for four years, and then lectured for two years (1241-1243).101 Upon becoming a Master in the Arts, he en-tered the Franciscan Order as a novice in 1243, and conti-nued his studies as a baccalarius theologiae under Alexan-der of Hales. Significantly, Bonaventure’s religious vocation marked the next step of his academic journey. Following the year novitiate, he formally entered the Franciscan Order in 1244, and, after completing the standard five years as au-ditor theologiae,102 John of Parma licensed him to teach in 1248. The license enabled Bonaventure to occupy the Fran-ciscan private chair, which was vacated by William of Mid-dleton who moved to the public chair to replace Odo Rigaud who left Paris to serve as archbishop of Rouen. As lector of the private chair, Bonaventure helped direct the lectorate program in the Franciscan studium, while he continued his own studies. He was a baccalarius biblicus for three years (1248-1251) and a baccalarius sententiarius for two (1252-

1243 or 1244, based on the context of the 1240’s, I posit a 1243 date; Quinn, “Chronology,” 178, 186, concurs.

101 See footnote 72 and related text.102 See footnote 100 and related text.


1253). Yet by 1250, the fragile truce between seculars and mendicants had fractured.

Although there was previous acrimony between the se-culars and mendicants at the University of Paris,103 the controversy of the 1250’s started anew when Innocent IV in-structed the Chancellor of Paris to license all qualified stu-dents, especially those belonging to religious orders; even if they had not requested a license.104 In response, the seculars at Paris issued Quoniam in promotione on February 1252, which declared that: (1) no regular could be admitted to the consortium magistrorum without affiliation with a studium at Paris; (2) every religious order could only have one chair and one school; and (3) no religious bachelor could become a master unless they had studied at a recognized studium and lectured under the supervision of a regent master recognized by the seculars.105 With the statute, the seculars tried “to deprive the Dominicans of one of their chairs and to ensure that the Franciscans could never gain a second.”106

In 1253, Bonaventure likely finished lecturing on the Sentences and became a formed bachelor (baccalaureaus for-matus), but his inception would have been blocked for two reciprocal reasons: the secular’s opposition embodied in Qu-oniam in promotione,107 and the fact that the Franciscan

103 Andrew Traver, “Rewriting History?” The Parisian Secular Master’s Apologia of 1254,” History of Universities 15 (1997-99), 10-12, lists four: the great dispersion of 1229, the question of pluralism in the 1230s, the 1237 issue of who and how the licentia docendi was to be granted, and the condemnations of both Franciscan and Dominican preachers in the early 1240’s.

104 CUP, n. 191, 219. For the narrative that follows, see Palémon Glo-rieux, “Le conflict de 1252-7 à la lumière du mémoire de Guillaume de St. Amour,” in Recherches de Théologie ancienne et médiévale 24 (1957): 364-72; Rashdall, The Universities of Europe, 376-91; Leff, Paris and Oxford Universities, 34-44; Roest, A History of Franciscan Education, 53-55.

105 CUP, n. 200, 226-27.106 Traver, “Rewriting History?” 12.107 The last two restrictions would have prevented Bonaventure from

incepting once he became a Baccalarius formatus in 1253. Dufeil, Guillau-me de Saint-Amour, 157-58 actually argues that the secular masters pro-duced this legislation, at least in part, to block Bonaventure’s entrance into the consortium magistorum because they did not want the Franciscans, like the Dominicans, to attain a second public regency. Also see Rash-dall, Universities, 376-77; Roest, A History of Franciscan Education, 54.

Jay M. HaMMond208

chair was already occupied by William of Middleton. Thus, Bonaventure simply kept lecturing from the private chair within the Franciscan studium.

The situation took a drastic turn following the riotous Lenten festivities in March 1253 during which a student was killed.108 While seeking restitution for the crime, the Uni-versity announced a cessation of all lectures,109 but three religious (two Dominicans and William of Middleton) con-tinued lecturing. In retaliation against the defiant mendi-cants, the seculars wrote Nos universitas in April (promul-gated 2 September),110 which stipulated that all masters of the consortium must swear an oath to observe the University statutes. After fifteen days, anyone who had not adhered to the statute would be excommunicated and expelled from the consortium.111 The Dominicans agreed to the statute, but only on the condition that their two chairs be perpetually preserved.112 The seculars refused to cede because such a concession would have directly undermined Quoniam in pro-motione. Once the University resumed lectures after a se-ven week hiatus, the seculars issued an edict of separation against the three regulars and began the formal process of excommunication.113 The mendicants appealed to the pope.

In July, Innocent IV entered the fray by issuing three let-ters in support of the regular cause. First, Amena flora (1 July), ordered the seculars to readmit the three mendicant masters into the university consortium until the pope could hear the case himself;114 the seculars refused. Transmissa nobis (21 July) followed, which absolved the three excommu-

108 Both Excelsi dextera (CUP I, n. 230, 254) and Quasi lignum vitae (CUP I, n. 247, 280) mention the event; also see Rashdall, The Universities of Europe, 376-83.

109 CUP I, n. 219, 242; also see Excelsi dextera (CUP I, n. 230, 254) and Quasi lignum vitae (CUP I, n. 247, 280), which both mention the event. The power of cessatio was granted in 1231 by Gregory IX’s Parens scientia-rum (CUP I, n. 79, 136-39).

110 CUP I, n. 219, 242-44.111 On the issue of the University’s power to excommunicate, see Tra-

ver, “Rewriting History?” 36, n. 37.112 CUP I, n. 230, 254-55.113 See CUP I, n. 224, 248 and n. 230, 255.114 CUP I, n. 222, 247.


nications against the regulars.115 The final decree, Excelsi dextera (26 August), which explicitly mentions the Domini-cans and Franciscans, warned the seculars not to promul-gate Nos universitas before 15 August 1254, which would al-low time for the pope to mediate the dispute. Accordingly, the pope sent a delegation to Paris to arbitrate the controversy.

However, likely unaware of the pope’s warning, the secu-lars officially released Nos universitas less than a week later on 2 September. The statute upheld the expulsion of the three mendicant masters and placed the Dominicans and Francis-cans under more stringent university control before the start of the Michaelmas term of 1253.116 Significantly, the statute focused its attention on the inception of new masters:

… no master may presume to hold a principium for any bachelor or to be present at his principium unless it were first clear to him that the same bachelor had been bound to the aforementioned [oath] in the usual way. Furthermore, a bachelor would in no way be ac-cepted by us as a master if he incepted in another way.117

Nos universitas was the last document, issued by either the seculars or the pope, including his legates, that will men-tion the Franciscans until almost three years later, with the decree of Licet olim (27 June 1256) delivered at Anagni during the condemnation of William of Saint-Amour.118 The ensuing silence from the seculars regarding the Fran-ciscans after September 1253 suggests that reconciliation

115 CUP I, n. 224, 248.116 According to the seculars’ own witness, as reported in Excelsi dex-

tera (CUP I, n. 230, 252-58), this is the last time that the seculars mention the Franciscans as disrupting the authority of the consortium. Thus some-time after this date and before 4 February 1254, John of Parma had recon-ciled with the seculars. On this point see footnote 120 and related text.

117 CUP, n. 219, 243: … nullus magister principium alicujus bache-larii tenere vel ejus principio interesse presumat, nisi prius ei constiterit, quod idem bachelarius ad predicta modo prehabito sit ligatus. Nec idem bachelarius, si alio modo inceperit, magister a nobis aliquatenus habea-tur.

118 CUP I, n. 281, 323-24.

Jay M. HaMMond210

was achieved. Thus, the seculars would not have protested against Bonaventure’s principium as long as he abided by the stipulations of Nos universitas. The silence implies that Bonaventure did.

The mendicant response to Nos universitas was twofold: one Dominican, one Franciscan. On the one hand, the Domi-nicans continued their fight against the University.119 On the other, the Franciscans reconciled with their secular col-leagues sometime after 2 September 1253 (Nos universitas) and before 4 February 1254 (Excelsi dextera).120 Both Tho-mas of Eccleston and Salimbene report that John of Parma traveled to Paris and delivered a reconciliatory sermon be-fore the University. Eccleston reports: “He quieted the unrest of the brothers at Paris by personally reminding them at the university of the simplicity of their profession and prevailed upon them to revoke their appeal.”121 The mention of an ap-peal suggests that the Franciscans may have been attemp-ting to acquire two public chairs like their Dominican coun-terparts.122

Salimbene’s report is more substantial. After recounting the allegory of the King planting a noble plant in his gar-den, Salimbene reports that John explained the allegory (the King: God the Father, the plant: the learning of the Paris faculty, and the garden: the lesser brothers of Francis), and then humbly pronounced before the entire university facul-ty:

119 The secular manifesto Excelsi dextera of 4 February 1254 even claims that the Dominicans rebelled against the University (CUP, n. 230, 256-57), but this must be interpreted prudently because it is reported by the seculars.

120 See footnote 144 and related text.121 Thomas of Eccleston, Tractatus de Adventu Fratrum Minorem in

Angliam, Analecta Franciscana 1 (1885), 244: Ipse frater Parisius persona-liter in Universitate, professionis simplicitatem protestans, revocata appe-llatione quam facerant, reconciliavit. The Tractatus was later reedited by Andrew Little, Fratris Thomae Vulgo Dicti de Eccleston Tractatus de Ad-ventu Fratrum Minorum in Angliam (Manchester: Manchester Universi-ty Press, 1951), 92. English translation, Placid Hermann, XIIIth Century Chronicles (Chicago: Franciscan Herald Press, 1961), 160-61.

122 Dufeil, Guillaume de Saint-Amour, 158.


Although I am unworthy and I serve against my own will, I am Minister General of the Lesser Brothers. You are our lords and our masters; we, your servants, sons, and disciples. And if we have any learning, we wish to acknowledge that it has come from you. I place myself and the Brothers who are under my rule un-der your discipline and correction. Behold, “We are in” your “hands: deal with us as it seem good and right unto you.”123 When they heard these things, they were all satisfied, and “their spirit was quieted, which had swelled against”124 the brothers.125

John of Parma’s willingness to place the Franciscans under the “discipline and correction” of the University sug-gests that the Franciscans agreed to abide by the academic regulations of the faculty, which remained the fracture bet-ween the Dominicans and the seculars as outlined in Excelsi dextera.126 Thus, the secular-Franciscan reconciliation li-kely involved: (1) agreement by the Franciscans, in accor-dance with Quoniam in promotione, to hold only one chair; (2) observance of Nos universitas, binding the Franciscan regent master to obey University statutes; and (3) the re-moval of William of Middleton as regent master.127 If the

123 Joshua 9:25.124 Judges 8:3.125 Chronica fratris Salimbene de Adam, in CCCM 125, 459: Ego

sum generalis minister Ordinis fratrum Minorum, quamvis insufficiens et indignus et contra voluntatem meam, vos estis domini et magistri nostri, nos vero servi vestri, filii et discipuli; et si aliquam scientiam habemus, a vobis volumus cognoscere nos habere. Expono memet ipsum et fratres qui sunt sub manu mea discipline et correctioni vestre. Ecce in manibus vestris sumus. Facite de nobis quod rectum et bonum vobis videtur. Audientes hoc omnes acceperunt satisfactionem, et quievit spiritus eorum, quo tumesce-bant contra fratres. English translation, The Chronicle of Salimbene de Adam, ed. Joseph Baird, 299-300.

126 See Quinn, “Chronology,” 179-80, and Rashdall, The Universities of Europe, 383, n. 4.

127 Most likely William remained in Paris, occupying the private chair in the Franciscan studium. It is clear that he was in Paris in the summer of 1255 when Alexander IV commissioned him to complete the Summa fratris (CUP I, n. 286, 328-29). The CUP dating of 28 July 1256 is incorrect. The critical edition of the Bull, found in Summa Theologica, ed. PP. Collegii S. Bonaventurae, vol. 1 (Quaracchi: Collegium S. Bonaventu-

Jay M. HaMMond212

compromise brokered by John of Parma required William to step down, then William and Bonaventure, who was already licensed by John in 1248 to lecture from the private chair, likely swapped their chairs, that is, Bonaventure ascended to the public chair recognized by the university while Wil-liam, expelled from consortium magistrorum by the secular masters,128 remained in Paris occupying the private chair within the Franciscan studium.129

The compromise necessitated Bonaventure’s inception before he could officially begin serving as regent master. Moreover, it can be inferred that his forthcoming principium adhered to the aforementioned stipulations regarding princi-pia as outlined in Nos universitas;130 otherwise, the seculars would have branded his inception as illegitimate. In effect, far from opposing Bonaventure’s inception, the compromise suggests that the seculars would have likely supported his inception because it appeased their ire against William of Middleton, capped the Franciscan chair at one, and ensured that the new regent, as part of his principium, would swear to obey any new statutes issued by the faculty. The compro-mise likewise satisfied John of Parma who desired peace, which the report of his sermon indicates.

After he passed his examinations,131 and with the sup-port of the University faculty,132 the university Chancel-

rae, 1924), vii-viii, identifies the correct date as 7 October 1255. The Bull is anonymously translated in Franciscan Studies 5 (1945): 350-51, which contains the correct dating.

128 CUP I, n. 219, 242-43; also see Traver, “Rewriting History?” 13.129 Such an exchange had already occurred between Alexander of Ha-

les and John of La Rochelle in 1241 when John moved to the public chair and Alexander to the private chair. On this point, see Dufeil, Guillaume de Saint-Amour, 6, and Glorieux, “D’Alexandre de Halès à Pierre Auriol,” 268-69. Moreover, it is clear that William was in Paris a year later when Alexander IV commissioned him to finish the Summa fratris; on this point see footnote 127.

130 See footnote 110 and related text.131 Bougerol, Introduction (1988), 5, claims that Bonaventure comple-

ted his examinations for the licentia docendi before 25 November 1253. 132 Robert Curzon’s 1215 code of statutes defines the related roles of

the chancellor and the masters (CUP I, n. 20, 80): “… the chancellor must confer on all candidates examined and recommended by the majority of the masters …” Later, Gregory IX’s bull Parens scientiarum (CUP I, n. 117, 163) confirms that the faculty had to examine and vote on candidates


lor granted Bonaventure the licentia docendi in January 1254.133 In that same month two other events relating to Bonaventure’s licensing and inception occurred. The first provides inferential evidence that Bonaventure’s licensing was not contested. On 29 January, Innocent IV instructed Aimeric to grant the licentia docendi to the Cistercian Guy of Aumone.134 However, Aimeric ignored the request becau-se he likely lacked faculty support.135 The seculars would not have cooperated with Guy’s examination because licen-sing him would directly undermine Quoniam in promotione (February 1252). Thus, Aimeric’s inaction signals that the-re were problems regarding the licensing of new regulars, which implies that the faculty and Aimeric did not oppose Bonaventure’s licensing. Again, I am doubtful that opposi-tion to Bonaventure’s inception and regency would have been passed over in silence.

The second supplies explicit evidence that Bonaven-ture, at the time of his licensing, was formulating ideas that would later appear in his inception sermon. On 6 January,136 Bonaventure delivered an Epiphany sermon

before the chancellor could license them to teach. In short, the masters examined and the chancellor conferred. On this point, see Gaines Post, “Alexander III, the Licentia Docendi, and the Rise of the Universities,” in Haskins Anniversary Essays in Medieval History (New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1929), 260-63 and 268-75, and “Parisian Masters as a Corporation, 1200-1246,” Speculum 9.4 (1934), 426; also see Walter Rüegg, “Themes,” in A History of the University in Europe, Volume I: Universities in the Middle Ages, ed. Hilde de Ridder-Symoens (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 23-24, Rashdall, The Universities of Europe, 282-83, Weije-rs, Terminologie, 387-88; Teeuwen, Vocabulary, 88-89, and Nancy Spatz, “Principia: A Study and Edition of Inception Speeches Delivered before the Faculty of Theology at the University of Paris, ca. 1180-1286,” Doctoral Dissertation, Cornell University, 1992, 39

133 Bougerol, Introduction (1988), 5.134 CUP I, n. 229, 252.135 Eventually Guy of Aumone would be granted the licentia docen-

di by two cardinals under orders from Alexander IV on 31 January 1256 (CUP I, n. 265, 302). See P. Michaud-Quantin, “Guy de l’Aumône, premier maître cistercien de l’Université de Paris,” Analecta sancti ordinis cister-ciensis 15 (1959): 194-219.

136 While not providing the rationale for his dating, Bougerol, Ser-mons de Diversis I, 212, comments, “It is possible that Bonaventure delive-red this [Epiphany] sermon on January 6, 1254 as the new Regent Master for the school of friars.” It may be Bougerol’s study of this sermon that led

Jay M. HaMMond214

that contains the same tenfold division of the sciences found in the De reductione.137 Commenting on Luke 15:8-10, the parable of the woman with ten coins, Bonaventure explains:

The woman, the rational soul, having ten coins, that is, ten illuminations of which there are three prin-ciples, namely the natural, the moral and the ratio-nal. And each of them has three: the natural contains physics, mechanics and mathematics; the rational likewise contains three: grammar, rhetoric, logic; the moral three: monastic, politics, economics; and beyond these there is a tenth illumination, namely, divine knowledge. And, the rational soul has lost such ulti-mate knowledge, because Hugh says, “in its light, the eye of the flesh is left behind, the rational eye is ob-scured, the eye of divine contemplation is completely blinded.” Therefore, because the rational soul has lost that tenth coin, namely, divine knowledge and con-templation, it searches for it in the historical mode, the allegorical mode, the tropological mode and the anagogical mode until it is found.138

him to change his dating of the De reductione. Whereas he had dated it to after the Hexaemeron (1273) [Bougerol, Introduction à l’étude de saint Bo-naventure (1961), 240-41; translated by José de Vinck, Introduction to the Works of Bonaventure (Paterson, N.J.: St. Anthony Guild Press, 1964), 163], he later comments, “it originally was a sermon delivered to the students between 1255 and 1257 and later transformed afterwards into a small treatise” [Introduction (1988), 220]. However, the later text also assigns different dates: 1254-1255 (xi). Benson’s research corroborates Bougerol’s claim that the De reductione was originally a sermon later transformed into a treatise.

137 Bougerol, Sermones de Tempore, 219. The sermon’s schema reads: “Sermon of brother Bonaventure at Paris on the Epiphany of the Lord before the university in the house of the lesser brothers” (In Epiphania Domini sermo fratris Bonaventurae Parisus coram universitate in domo fratrum minorum).

138 Bougerol, Sermones de Diversis I, 221: Mulier, anima rationalis, habens decem drachmas, id est decem illuminationes quarum tres principa-les, scilicet naturalis, moralis et rationalis. Et quaelibet istarum habet tres: naturalis continent physicam, mechanicam et mathematicam; rationalis similiter continent tres: grammaticam, rhetoricam, logicam; moralis tres: monasticam, politicam, oeconomicam; et ultra istas est decima illuminatio, scilicet cognitio divina. Et istam ultimam cognitionem anima rationalis


The passage parallels the later inception sermon in two ways. First, as mentioned, its classification of the sciences mir-rors the De reductione with the exception of the mechanical arts, which both the schema for the Epiphany sermon139 and the De reductione replace with metaphysics.140 However, the mention of the mechanical arts foreshadows the De reducti-one because the latter begins with the exterior light of the mechanical arts.141 As explained by Benson, starting with the mechanical arts as the first of four lights makes much more sense when interpreted in conjunction with the sermon Omnium artifex docuit me sapientia, the first part of Bona-venture’s inception sermon.142

Second, the proposed method of following Scripture’s four senses to discover the “tenth coin” of divine contemplation parallels the two parts of Bonaventure’s inception sermon that would soon follow. The sermon Omnium artifex focused more on Scripture’s efficient, material, formal and final cau-ses, and the De reductione followed with a consideration of how Scripture’s three spiritual senses reduce all knowledge to theology.143 In other words, the Epiphany sermon, like

amisit, quia dicit Hugo, quod “oculus carnis in sua luce remansit, oculus rationis obnubilatus, oculus divinae contemplationis excaecatus.” Quia igitur anima rationalis istam decimam drachmam, scilicet divinae cogni-tionis et contemplationis amiserat, ideo quaerit eam modo historice, modo allegorice, modo tropologice, mode anagogice quousque eam inveniat.

139 Bougerol, Sermones de Tempore, 221: Mulier haec significat ani-mam rationalem quae habet decem drachmas, id est novem partes scientiae philosophicae et decima drachma est sapientia divina scilicet, sacra theo-logia. Tres enim sunt scientiae philosophicae scilicet: – naturalis divisa in physicam, metaphysicam et mathematicam; – rationalis sive sermocinalis divisa in grammaticam, in logicam et in rethoricam; – moralis divisa in oeconomicam, monosticam et politicam.

140 De red. 2 (Opera theologica selecta, 5.217b).141 De red. 4 (Opera theologica selecta, 5.220b).142 Benson, “Identifying,” 172-76.143 Benson, “Identifying,” 158-60. The schema for the Epiphany ser-

mon does not mention the spiritual senses. It simply reads, “In relation to the last coin, they all should be abandoned and the tenth coin sought, that is, theology or the wisdom of Christ, which today is commonly abando-ned in imitating curious philosophical knowledge.” Bougerol, Sermones de Tempore, 221: Quae omnes dimittendae sunt in relatione ad finem et quae-renda decima drachma scilicet, theologia sive sapientia Christi, quae hodi

Jay M. HaMMond216

the De reductione, presents a similar, albeit more compact, scriptural method of searching all knowledge with the spi-ritual senses with the goal of arriving at the summit of all knowledge, theology. Both the division of the sciences and the scriptural method in the Epiphany sermon illustrate that Bonaventure explored ideas that would soon appear in the De reductione.

Between January and April 1254 two significant events occurred before Bonaventure incepted: the seculars publis-hed Excelsi dextera on 4 February,144 and Gerard of Borgo San Donnino published his Liber introductorium in evan-gelium aeternum.145 The first reveals three things. (1) The title of Excelsi dextera indicates that the seculars’ strong ac-cusations against the Dominicans was a direct snub to In-nocent IV’s warnings in the earlier Bull Excelsi dextera not to attack the regulars. (2) The seculars expanded the conflict by addressing the apologia to prelate alumni of Paris in an effort to gain secular clergy support beyond the University against the Dominicans. (3) The apologia is directed exclu-sively against the Dominicans; the Franciscans are notably absent. The Dominican focus is highlighted by the fact that the statute denounces them for not honoring the cessatio of 1229, but completely omits the Franciscans who also did not observe the cessations of 1229 and 1253. Shortly after the apologia (26 February), the seculars issued a statute to tax students in order to fund the delegation going to Rome to plead the University’s case against the Dominicans. Again, the statute only mentions the Dominicans.146 The seculars’ strategy is twofold, plead their case to sympathizers while defending their position to the pope.

est perdita communiter in imitantibus scientiam philosophicam curiose. Yet the general thrust of all three is similar: all knowledge leads back to theology.

144 CUP I, n. 230, 252-58. Traver, “Rewriting History?” 18-30.145 Heinrich Denifle, “Das Evangelium aeternum und die Commission

zu Anagni,” Archiv für Litteratur- und Kirchengeschichte des Mittelalters 1 (1885): 57, only gives the date 1254; Dufeil, Guillaune de Saint-Amour, 118, is a bit more specific, dating it to the spring of 1254.

146 CUP I, n. 231, 258.


The second publication helped the secular cause against the Dominicans. The conflict between the two groups helps explain why the Liber introductorium, when it first cir-culated, was identified as being written by an anonymous Dominican.147 Considering their ire against the Domini-cans, it is not surprising that the seculars tried to pin the damning text on their foes.

Both Excelsi dextera and the Liber introductorium have bearing on Bonaventure’s inception. The silence regarding the Franciscans in the former implies that the seculars would not have opposed Bonaventure’s inception because their grievances against the minors had been settled. The scan-dal caused by the latter actually appears in Bonaventure’s inception. “The first part of Bonaventure’s inception sermon, Omnium artifex, reads: This [sacred Scripture] is the law that stands in eternity. This [sacred Scripture] is the eternal gospel.”148 The passing reference indicates that the scandal caused by the Liber introductorium had not yet exploded, but that would soon change after Bonaventure’s inception.

In April, likely around Easter (12 April),149 Bonaventure incepted and became magister regens of the Franciscan chair at Paris.150 His principium in aula was entitled Omnium artifex docuit me sapientia and his resumptio the next day was the De reductione artium ad theologiam.151 As part of

147 Marjorie Reeves, The Influence of Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages: A Study in Joachimism (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969), 63, n. 2, but later attribution to John of Parma in 1255 contributed to his removal as General Minister because, even though he was not the author, he refused to renounce his Joachimism.

148 Unpublished transcription of Naples 7.F.21, ff. 254a-257a by Jos-hua Benson: “Baruch 4 haec [sacra scriptura] lex que in eternum stat. Hoc [sacra scriptura] est evangelium eternum Apocalyso 4.” For a description of the manuscript, see Benson, “Identifying,” 164-66.

149 See footnote 77 and related text.150 If there was any secular acrimony over Bonaventure’s inception,

Alexander IV, the Order’s former cardinal protector, would have taken swift action to ameliorate the situation. However, the lack of any such evidence indicates that Bonaventure became regent master with little to no opposition from the seculars. In other words, the fact that the seculars only oppose the Dominicans, which the pope vigorously defends, indicates that the seculars no longer opposed the Franciscans.

151 Benson, “Identifying,” 172-78. If Bonaventure received the licentia docendi in January and later incepts in April, this would parallel the pro-

Jay M. HaMMond218

the inception process, he also delivered his Quaestio dispu-tata de scientia Christi.152 These three texts provide special insight into Bonaventure’s inception; an event where he ad-dressed the wider University community about the pressing issue of the 1250s: how and whether to formulate theology as a science according to the Aristotelian causes. In other words, Bonaventure’s inception engaged the perennial ques-tion of the relationship between theology and the sciences.

First, Bonaventure interpreted the incipit, Omnium arti-fex docuit me sapientia (Wisdom 7:21), which he extrapolated to all of Scripture, according to Aristotle’s four causes. God, the artifex, is the supreme efficient cause. Omnium relates to the material cause. Sapientia concerns the formal cause. And docuit me covers the final cause. Each cause further sub-divides with four attributes.153 By examining Scripture ac-cording to Aristotelian causality, Bonaventure presented his audience with theology conceived as a science, and invited

cess of Thomas Aquinas who was granted the licentia docendi in January/February and incepted in March/April. Such a process agrees with the analysis of Spatz, “Principia,” 39-40, “Each candidate deemed ready by his master would be presented to the chancellor in front of the faculty to re-quest the license ... Within the next few months the candidate would have to participate in three ceremonies to be a full-fledged master of theology.”

152 Bougerol, Introduction (1988), 5, and Quinn, “Chronology,” 181.153 Benson, unpublished transcription of Naples 7.F.21, ff. 254a-257a:

(1) Scripture’s efficient cause has a fourfold privilege: superiority of rea-son, priority of proclamation, majority of correction, and stability of autho-rity; (2) its material cause, a fourfold unity of conscience: unity of practical comprehension, unity of total perfection, unity of principal attribution, and unity of uniform consideration; (3) its formal cause, a fourfold dignity that is: most high in its principles, most certain in its meanings, most pro-found in its mysteries, and most clear in its necessities; (4) its final cause, a fourfold utility: knowledge of the truth, argument of happiness, discer-nment of iniquity, education of charity. [254va, ll. 34-35: … quadruplex fortiter privilegium scilicet: superioritatem rationis, [prioritatem] editionis, maioritatem correctionis, stabilitatem adhesionis; 255rb, ll. 34-35: … qua-druplex conscientiae unitas scilicet: unitas utilis comprehensionis, unitas totalis perfectionis, unitas principalis attributionis, unitas uniformis con-siderationis; 255vb, ll. 40-45: … quattuor ipsa consequitur dignitas scilicet quia est altissima in principiis, certissima in sententiis, profundissima in misteriis, planissima in necessariis; 256vb, ll. 24-25: ... quadruplex con-surgit utilitas scilicet cognitio veritatis, argumentacio felicitatis, discrectio iniquitatis, erudicio caritatis…]


them to consider how Scripture produces verifiable know-ledge derived from first principles.154

Second, the De reductione shares close thematic affini-ties with a thirteenth-century guidebook (c. 1230 to 1240) for Parisian students preparing for examinations in the Arts,155 which, interestingly, was the time when Bonaven-ture had studied them. Like the De reductione, the guide-book first divides philosophy according to Boethius’s broad threefold division: natural, moral and rational. It then sub-divides the arts according to an Aristotelian classification of the sciences. Although the order differs (natural first, rati-onal third), the subdivisions of natural (metaphysics, ma-thematics and physics) and rational philosophy (grammar, rhetoric, logic) match the De reductione. The classification of moral philosophy concerns a threefold consideration of the life of the soul (in relation to God, to others, to itself). The guidebook classifies theology as the first practical sci-ence (soul in relation to God), and considers the other two subdivisions according to Aristotle’s ethics (the individual, family and state). Here the De reductione deviates from the guidebook by considering theology as sapientia that is dis-tinct from but hidden in all scientia, and by renaming the first subcategory (i.e., monastic) and the other two according

154 As Benson illustrates, “Identifying,” 172-73, the fourfold structure of Omnium artifex segues nicely with the four lights of the De reductione.

155 MS Ripoll 109 f. 134r-158v is housed in the Archives of the Crown of Aragon, Barcelona. It was discovered by Martin Grabmann, “Eine für Examenszwecke abgefasste Quaestionensammlung der Pariser Artisten-fakultät aus der ersten Hälfte des 13 Jahrhunderts,” Revue néoscolastique de philosophie 36 (1934): 211-29. For the text see Claude Lafleur and Joan-ne Carrier, Le “Guide de l’étudiant” d’un maître anonyme de la Faculté des arts de Paris au XIIIe siècle (Québec: Université Laval, 1992); for analysis see Claude Lafleur, Quatre introductions à la philosophie au XIIIe siècle: textes critique et étude historique (Montréal/Paris: J. Vrin, 1988), a helpful overview of student life in the Arts faculty is found on 141-54; also see Claude Lafleur and Joanne Carrier, L’enseignement de la philosophie au XIIIe siècle. Autour du “Guide de l’étudiant” du ms. Ripoli 109 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1997), 3-58; Leff, Paris and Oxford Universities, 141-42; and Char-les Lohr, “The Ancient Philosophical Legacy and Its Transmission to the Middle Ages,” in A Companion to Philosophy in the Middle Ages, ed. Jorge Gracia and Timothy Noone (Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2003), 16-17.

Jay M. HaMMond220

to Aristotle’s categories of economics and politics.156 Thus, the Aristotelian categories of the De reductione would have been very familiar to the audience for it actually follows the Arts program at Paris.157 In a very real way, the second part of Bonaventure’s inception was indeed a reduction of the arts to theology. With the De reductione, Bonaventure invited his fellow teachers and students to reflect on how the sciences they were teaching and learning ultimately lead back to the knowledge and love of God.158

Third, there is a thematic link between the De reductione and the De scientia Christi. In the former Bonaventure com-ments:

Metaphysics concerns the knowledge of all beings ac-cording to the ideal reasons, which reduce to one first principle from which they proceeded, that is, to God in as far as God is the beginning, the end, and the exemplar. However, there has been some controversy among the metaphysicians concerning these ideal reasons.159

156 The author of the guidebook did not know Aristotle’s Oeconomica and Politica. The De reductione’s threefold division of moral philosophy indicates that by 1254, these two works were known for they help form Bonaventure’s tripartite classification of moral philosophy.

157 On 19 March 1255, the university officially published its texts and sequencing for the arts curriculum, which was dominated by Aristotle’s corpus (CUP I, n. 246, 277). In effect, Aristotle’s natural philosophy and metaphysics now became a requirement for graduation.

158 Interestingly the question of the relationship between philosophy and theology appears within the guidebook itself where it makes a distinc-tion between theological ethics and philosophical ethics, which possesses a certain sense of autonomy. On this point, see Georg Wieland, “L’émergence de l’éthique philosophique au XIIIe siècle, avec une attention spéciale pour le ‘Guide de l’étudiant parisien,” in Le “Guide de l’étudiant” d’un maître anonyme, 169-71, 179-80; also see Leff, Paris and Oxford Universities, 142.

159 De red 4 (Opera theologica selecta, 5.220b): metaphysica, circa cognitionem omnium entium, quae reducit ad unum primum principium, a quo exierunt secundum rationes ideales, sive ad Deum in quantum prin-cipium, finis, et exemplar; licet inter metaphysicos de huiusmodi rationi-bus idealibus nonnulla fuerit controversia. For an earlier treatment of the ideal reasons see, I Sent d.1, p.1, a.1, q.1 ad 3-4, ac dub. 2 (Opera omnia, vol. 1, 17, 36-37).


In typical fashion, Bonaventure understands metap-hysics to concern the knowledge of all things according to the primum principium who is the beginning, the end, and the exemplar.160 In passing he also mentions a controversy that he assumed his audience knew. As mentioned, it likely refers to the contested question of whether theology was a science, which directly involved the ideal reasons on two interrelated levels: metaphysics and epistemology. To answer both, Bona-venture turned to the mystery of the hypostatic union. Thus, the question of Christ’s knowledge was not esoteric specula-tion, but a solution to a pressing issue of the day.

It is unclear which four of the seven questions Bonaven-ture disputed at his inception,161 but it would make sense for him to have engaged the first four because the first three questions establish the metaphysics of the ideal reasons (Q. 1: ideal reasons grounded in God’s infinity; Q. 2: God’s know-ledge of creation is an expressed likeness of the eternal re-asons; Q. 3: God’s divine Idea is singular, but contains all ideal causes), and the fourth epistemologically explains how certitude is possible between a finite subject and an infinite object (Q. 4: The soul contuits the eternal reason as the regu-lative and motivating principle in created objects). In effect, Bonaventure invited his audience (1) to understand the me-taphysics of the ideal reasons correctly so that (2) they would epistemologically know the objects of sense experience in the light of the eternal reasons. Bonaventure showed his audien-ce that Aristotelian epistemology could and should lead to God, the primary object of human knowledge.

Soon after Bonaventure incepted, the fallout from the Liber introductorium started. No doubt the seculars were

160 J. A. Wayne Hellmann, Divine and Created Order in Bonaventure’s Theology, tran. Jay M. Hammond (St. Bonaventure: The Franciscan Insti-tute, 2001), 9-13.

161 For a detailed analysis of the mandatory four questions disputed in the vesperies (two questions) and the aula (two questions) see, Ber-nardo Bazàn, “Les Questions Disputées, Principalement dans les Facultés de Théologie,” in Les Questions Disputées et les Questions Quodlibétiques dans les Facultés de Théologie, de Droit et de Médecine, ed. Bernardo Bazàn et al. (Turnhout: Brepols, 1985), 112-22.

Jay M. HaMMond222

anxious to publicize the incriminating text against the Domi-nicans, to whom, at this early stage of the controversy, the au-thorship of the scandalous text was attributed.162 Sometime between March and June,163 the bishop of Paris sent thirty-one errors compiled from the Liber introductorium and Joa-chim’s Concordia novi et veteris Testamenti with the delega-tion of William of Saint-Amour, Chrétien of Beauvais, Eudes of Douai and Laurence Langlais who were already trave-ling to Rome to argue the secular position before Innocent IV.164 Although the pope died before making a formal judg-ment regarding the Liber introductorium,165 the delegation was nevertheless successful. Over the next several months Innocent IV’s decrees favored the secular cause over against his previous support of the mendicants.

On 10 May, Innocent IV issued his first anti-mendicant decree, which placed local restrictions upon mendicant privileges,166 but it does not explicitly mention the Fran-ciscans. Two months later on 4 July, he issued Quotiens pro communi, which ordered that all university statutes must be observed by all University members.167 Thus, the regulars

162 See footnote 147 and related text.163 CUP I, n. 243, 272. Unfortunately, the letter is not dated. Palémon

Glorieux, “Le conflict de 1252-7 à la lumière du mémoire de Guillaume de St. Amour,” 366, dates the trip during March to June. For analysis of the 31 errors see, Denifle, “Das Evangelium Aeternum,” 70-88, and Bernhard Töpfer, “Eine Handschrift des Evangelium aeternum des Gerardino von Borgo San Donnino,” Zeitschrift für Geschichtswissenschaft 7 (1960): 119-21.

164 William, the University proctor (CUP I, n. 238, p. 265), leads the delegation. Denifle, “Das Evangelium Aeternum,” 84-87, claims that Wi-lliam and his associates were the authors of the 31 errors, which they car-ried to Rome on behalf of the bishop of Paris. Note that William, Chrétien and Eudes continued to play key roles in the secular-mendicant controver-sy through 1256.

165 On 23 October 1255 Alexander IV issued Libellum quemdam (CUP I, n. 257, 297), which condemned the Liber introductorium in evange-lium aeternum. The Bull orders the book destroyed and anyone possessing a copy excommunicated. On 4 November Alexander IV then instructed the Bishop of Paris to destroy prudently the Liber introductorium so as to protect the Franciscans (CUP I, n. 258, 298). Thus, by this time Gerard of Borgo of San Donino was known as the author, but some claimed it was John of Parma; see Reeves, Prophecy in the Later Middle Ages, 63.

166 CUP I, n. 236, 263.167 CUP I, n. 237, 265.


had to abide by all the consortium’s statutes including obser-ving any new suspension of lectures. Neither the Dominicans nor Franciscans are mentioned by name. On 21 November he issued Esti animarum, which stripped the mendicants of their ministerial privileges granted by previous popes.168 In effect, Innocent IV’s dramatic reversal of papal policy made the mendicants subservient to secular ecclesiastics, where-as before they had been their widely popular competitors. Henceforth, Dominican and Franciscan ministries (prea-ching, confession, burial) were placed under local diocesan control. However, with the death of Innocent IV on 7 Decem-ber, the papal policy would drastically change.

Alexander IV, the Franciscan Order’s Cardinal Protector, became pope on 12 December 1254. The sea change was im-mediate. On 22 December he repealed Etsi animarum with the Bull Nec insolitum, which restored all ministerial privile-ges to the mendicants.169 Four months later, he issued Quasi lignum vitae (14 April 1255), which bolstered their magiste-rial status at Paris by resolving every point of the secular-mendicant dispute in favor of the friars.170 Of course, Quasi lignum vitae did not end the secular-mendicant controversy; rather secular reaction to it signaled a significant shift in strategy. Led by William of Saint-Amour, they began to chal-lenge the validity of the mendicant religious life itself. In two short years, a quarrel over the mendicants’ status within the University expanded into a question of their very existence within the church.

168 CUP I, n. 240, 267-70.169 CUP I, n. 244, 276.170 CUP I, n. 247, 279. Quasi lignum vitae (1) overturns the minis-

terial decrees against the mendicants, (2) annuls the July 1254 expulsion of the two Dominicans and orders their reintegration, (3) invalidates any limit on chairs held by mendicants, (4) gives the university chancellor the power to determine the number of chairs held by religious orders, and (5) limits the oath to obey university statutes required before becoming a master by making it binding according to a two-thirds majority.

Jay M. HaMMond224

conclusion

In 1254 Bonaventure incepted around Easter (12 April), and delivered the De reductione as the second part of his inception sermon. The direct evidence from the sources is threefold. (1) Based on the fixed date of Bonaventure’s elec-tion as General Minister in 1257, the Catalogus Generalium Ministrorum (c. 1304), Catalogus XIV vel XV Generalium (c. 1304), and Chronica XXIV Generalium all forthrightly report that Bonaventure became a master and received a chair at Paris in 1254. (2) The Chronica adds an important detail not included in the two Catalogi: Bonaventure’s inception must have occurred after 25 March 1254. Significantly, the events reported immediately before and after the 1254 inception date can be externally verified. (3) The Epiphany sermon (6 January 1254) contains the same tenfold division of the sci-ences found in the De reductione, which shows that Bona-venture was exploring ideas that would soon appear in his inception sermon three months later.

The analysis also provides two pieces of indirect eviden-ce. (1) According to Salimbene, John of Parma licensed Bo-naventure as a lector not a magister in 1248. As lector Bona-venture assisted William of Middleton by teaching from the private chair within the Franciscan studium, which involved responsibility for the large non-degree lectorate program. (2) The context of 1253-1254 compellingly proposes that if the compromise brokered by John of Parma required William to step down from the public chair, then Bonaventure, who was already licensed by John in 1248 to lecture from the private chair, likely swapped chairs with William. Thus, Bonaven-ture ascended to the public chair while William occupied the private chair within the Franciscan studium. The swap ne-cessitated Bonaventure’s inception.

The research also judges the accuracy and therefore the reliability of the seven witnesses from the thirteen and fourteenth centuries. While six of the sources can be inter-preted so as to triangulate with each other, the Chronica Franciscis Fabrianensis (c. 1322) contains significant errors, e.g., Bonaventure’s election date as General Minister, the length of his generalate, and his licensing under Alexander


of Hales. Francis’s witness also can not synchronize with the other sources without altering key dates within those sour-ces. Thus, the evidence suggests that it is an unreliable re-source that should be set aside as a source for constructing Bonaventure’s chronology.

The data compiled to date Bonaventure’s inception also has implications for his chronology in two key ways. (1) Bonaventure was likely born in 1221 not 1217. Arguments for a 1217 favor inferential evidence from external sources rather than the explicit evidence from the two Catalogi and the Chronica. Furthermore, a 1217 dating must alter dates reported in the two Catalogi and overlook a key omission in the Chronica that signals Bonaventure was not forty when he was elected in 1257. (2) The almost three year silence re-garding any secular opposition to the Franciscans strongly suggests that Bonaventure was received into the consortium magistrorum at the time of his inception. While this must be explained more clearly,171 it undermines the dominate narrative that he remained unrecognized by the University until 1256 or 1257.

Finally, the three texts that form Bonaventure’s inception, Omnium artifex docuit me sapientia, De reductione artium ad theologiam, and Quaestio disputata de scientia Christi, provi-de insight into how Bonaventure responded to the perennial question of the 1250’s at the University of Paris, namely, the relationship between theology and the Aristotelian sciences. Each text illustrates the compatibility between the two even though the scientia of philosophy finds its completion in the sapientia of theology. I look forward to Benson’s publication of Omnium artifex docuit me sapientia because without it, the De reductione will remain an incomplete text.

171 As mentioned in footnote 3, the next issue of Franciscan Studies will contain my essay, “Dating Bonaventure’s Recognition as Regent Mas-ter,” which demonstrates that the seculars accepted him into the consor-tium magistrorum at the time of his inception in 1254.

Jay M. HaMMond226

I end with a synopsis of Bonaventure’s Chronology:

1221 Bonaventure’s birth1235-41 Studies the Arts at 141241-43 Lectures on the Arts as a bachelor at 201243 Master of Arts, enters novitiate; begins status

as auditor theologiae at 221244 Profession, officially enters the Order at 231248 Licensed lector biblicus by John of Parma at

27; lectures from private chair1248-51 Baccalarius biblicus1251-53 Baccalarius sententiarius1253 Baccalarius formatus1254 Incepted as master to replace William of Mid-

dleton at 331257 Elected General Minister at 35 (36 if born be-

fore 2 February)

Jay M. HammondSaint Louis University

67.hammond02

Documents

bonaventure new york

saint bonaventure

bonaventure incepting

bonaventures chronology

bonaventures inception

crowley claim bonaventure

hammond franciscan studies

bonaventures recognition