This is a reproduction of a library book that was digitized

by Google as part of an ongoing effort to preserve the

information in books and make it universally accessible.

https://books.google.com
B 1,363,976
 Y
T
I
S
MICHIGA

R
E
V
I
N OF
U
1
OF
E
TH

LIBR
ARIE
" S"
GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
TEXTES PHILOSOPHIQUES DU MOYEN AGE

XVIII

1 ham , of Conches, 1080 126 , 1150

GUILLAUME DE CONCHES

GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

EDITED,
WITH INTRODUCTION AND NOTES,

BY

BRADFORD WILSON

PARIS
LIBRAIRIE PHILOSOPHIQUE J. VRIN
6, Place de la Sorbonne, Ve

1980
878

J70

W75

1980

La loi du 11 mars 1957 n'autorisant, aux termes des alinéas 2 et 3 de l'article 41, d'une
part, que « les copies ou reproductions strictement réservées à l'usage privé du copiste
et non destinées à une utilisation collective » et, d'autre part, que les analyses et les courtes
citations dans un but d'exemple et d'illustration, «< toute représentation ou reproduction
intégrale, ou partielle, faite sans le consentement de l'auteur ou de ses ayants droit ou
ayants cause, est illicite » (alinéa 1er de l'Article 40).
Cette représentation ou reproduction, par quelque procédé que ce soit, constituerait donc
une contrefaçon sanctionnée par les Articles 425 et suivants du Code Pénal.
Librairie Philosophique J. VRIN, 1980
Printed in France
For my parents,
with love.
 EDITORIAL SIGNS USED IN THE TEXT

< > Diamond brackets indicate an emendation; the manuscript

reading appears in the notes.
t .... t Daggers indicate damage or scribal confusion; an explanation
of the problem appears in the notes.
[ ] Brackets enclose a word or words which the editor believes
should be omitted to improve the sense.

SIGLA

W Baltimore. Walters Art Gallery 20. XII S.

P Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale Fonds Latin 2904. XII S.
B Oxford Bodleian Library Auct . F. 6. 9. XII S.

The editor used as the standard edition of Juvenal Ulrich Knoche's

edition of the Saturae found in the series Das Wort der Antike (München,
Max Hueber Verlag, 1950) .

A Note on Punctuation and Capitalization

in the Text of the Glosae.

Punctuation generally indicates relationships of grammatical units -

whether within or between sentences or sense units. Its assumes
complete sentences are the norm of a text; given such completeness,
punctuation can be consistently applied. In this text a large percentage
of glosses are not complete sentences, though many glosses include
complete sentences. So, with a mix of grammatically complete and
incomplete sentences, consistency of punctuation is impossible and can
sometimes be misleading. My solution was to punctuate complete sen-
tences within each gloss, allow the lemmata to act as punctuating or
separating devices, and leave unpunctuated incomplete, fragmentary sen-
tences. The text appears rather informal as a result. Punctuation reflects,
for the most part, sense units. I think this system presents the text
honestly and readably. I appreciate the advice of Mlle M.-T. d'Alverny
and Mr. W. Braxton Ross on this matter.
 CONTENTS

PREFACE 11

Part one

Three essays on the Glosses and William of Conches

I. The tradition of Juvenal glosses and the relationship of the

manuscripts of the Glosae in Iuvenalis Satiras 17
II. The nature and function of William of Conches' Glosae in
Iuvenalis Satiras 49

III. The Career and Writings of William of Conches 75

Part two

An edition of the Glosses

Wilelmi de Conchis Glosae in Iuvenalis Satiras 87

BIBLIOGRAPHY 195

INDEX NOMINUM ET VERBORUM 201

INDEX TO THE INTRODUCTORY ESSAYS 205

INDEX AUCTORUM A WILELMO DE CONCHIS LAUDATORUM 207

 PREFACE

This monograph presents the results of an inquiry into the paleogra-

phical and material relationship of three twelfth-century manuscripts:
two which preserve differing versions of William of Conches' Glosae in
Iuvenalis Satiras - Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale Fonds Latin 2904, pp. 221-
239 (P), and Baltimore, Walters Art Gallery 20, fols. 1-5 (W), and one
which shows a close relationship with them, Oxford, Bodleian Library Auct.
F. 6.9, fols. 1-23 (B). The monograph assumes that our discussion of the
significance of the matter of William's Glosae depends on our knowledge
of the relationship and dating of the manuscripts, and that that knowledge
in turn depends on a careful edition of both P and W, and of excerpts
of B.
Thus the work consists of two parts, the first of which is a set of
three essays, the second an edition of the manuscripts. Chapter One
presents an inquiry into the dating and relationship of the manuscripts.
The Baltimore manuscript, W, preserves a version of the glosses on the
first two satires lacking two extensive sections: glosses to Satire 1. 15-40,
and to Satire 2. 1-64. The glosses are in two very different scribal hands.
We concluded that the first lacuna represents, along with the progressively
greater abbreviation of the glosses to 1. 1-14, omission by scribe W-1 of
matter because of lack of space; the second lacuna, a blank space in W,
clearly reflects a page missing in W's exemplar. Further, we pointed out
numerous muddled passages, confused quotations, frequent use of the
question-answer format (quaestiones ), a certain note-like quality, and the
generally rudimentary character of the critical terms used, all of which,
along with evidence of the mutilation and probable confusion of W's
exemplar, suggest that W is a copy from around 1175, placed around a
text of Juvenal prepared about 1150, of a student reportatio of William's
lectures. W's exemplar apparently did not surround a text of Juvenal.
P, we concluded , is an edition of an authoritative version of William's
Glosae, one which is independent of the W tradition, and a tradition which,
on the whole, gives evidence of accurate and faithful scribes. P preserves
more lengthy glosses, has a more polished , less note-like quality, and has
versions of the glosses, muddled in W, which could not have been recons-
tructed from the W version. P always preserves quotations from
other sources more accurately than W. P appears to be from about
1200, perhaps a bit later than W; it was bound early with other
12 GLOSSES TO JUVENAL

glosses and rhetorics and collections of fables, which suggests that it was
intended for student use.
We concluded that P was the authoritative version partly from
evidence preserved in B. B is a gloss compiled at Saint-Victor near Paris,
and evidence of script, abbreviations, and production lead us to date it in
or before 1150. B preserves excerpts of William's Glosae which are
clearly taken from a manuscript of the P tradition. P, consequently, was
in the form we now have it in William's lifetime, and was the « publi-
shed, » circulated version.
Chapter II is an investigation of and argument concerning the nature
and function of William's Glosae. Three interrelated questions guide the
inquiries. First, why are the glosses the way they are ? That is, what
determined their nature ? Our explanation rests mainly in the critical
assumptions, terms, and methods William used , the character of Juvenal's
Satires as William understood them, and the historical role of William
the teacher, Chartrian, and humanist. These causae determine the prin-
ciples of selection of matter that William used when making his glosses,
just as William apparently sought to explain Juvenal's poetic principles
of selection in moral, imitative, and rhetorical terms.
Second, we asked what the effect is of the combination of the glosses
with the Satires. That is, how do they function ? We first described
William's triplex lectio - which he adumbrates elsewhere - — consisting of
poetica, physica, and philosophica lectio. We also suggested that the
poetic nature of Juvenal's satires is one of creating the effect of an attack
on certain historical particulars and customs . William's glosses, then,
shift the object of attack from the particular historicity of Juvenal to a
broader triplex lectio: an attack on historical characters, moral, philoso-
phical issues, and physiological and scientific topics. The three are
clearly related in William's mind . The triplex lectio is a principle or guide
for selecting and relating the matter of the glosses to the Satires. William
develops an historical, integumental explanation of the satires based upon
such characters as Nero, Eliodorus, Maecenas , and Messalina: he argues
that Juvenal attacks them in his Satires by circumlocution (or integu-
ment). William believes, though, that Juvenal attacks not only particular
men and customs but also moral vices - say, gluttony - by vivid
description of the character and consequences of the moral sin in which
the historic character indulged -for example, death from inability to
digest an undercooked peacock. Indirect attack is, for William, the
essence of the art of the satires. Thus William wove together medical,
scientific (which was unusual for his time), moral, and historical material
to focus and shape our response to the satires as well as to explain their
particular nature.
Our third question is what is William's method of explication ? As a
result, the chapter concludes with a close analysis of the interaction of the
glosses with Satire 1.
The three inquiries constitute an argument. The problem addressed
is basically << what can the glosses and the satires accomplish together
that separately they cannot ? » We examine the literary theories, terms,
 PREFACE 13

assumptions, and methods that are determining causes of the form or

nature of the glosses, and these provide us with the information necessary
to address the problem in the second section, where we present our thesis
that the glosses shift the objects of attack of the satires, and also shift
the satires from the main aim of creating the effect of an attack to the
aim of moral persuasion. The third inquiry examines carefully the evi-
dence in the satires and glosses to support such a thesis and shows its
validity.
William then, as we have said, shifts and broadens the object of the
attack, profoundly altering, by the intimate relation of gloss to text, the
particularity of the poetic attack. The causes of his doing so can in part
be found in his role of teacher and twelfth-century Chartrian philosopher.
Thus our third chapter attempts to describe William the historical and
intellectual personage who wrote this particular gloss, probably during
the 1130's, on a first-century satirist.
The introduction culminates in a historical chapter because historical
explanation is basic to its thesis. William made the gloss as we find it, a
gloss of its particular character, because he happened to exist at a certain
point in time ( 1090-1155) . He came into contact with and was influenced
by historical figures such as Bernard of Chartres, and Peter Abelard, and
later Gilbert of Poitiers and Clarembaud of Arras. He was limited by
the date of his death and the span of his career to know only the Timaeus
of Plato, the logical treatises of Aristotle (though probably not the
Posterior Analytics), and the earliest translations of Arabic medical and
astronomic works. He taught, most likely, at Chartres, and was clearly
a part of the brief blossoming associated with the town, called the
« School of Chartres. » Therefore William's interaction with the satires,
and the interaction of his glosses with them, can be explained to a great
degree by the historical accident of his span of life and the places he
lived. The matter he chose to include in his glosses, its method and his
critical assumptions, his techniques of interpretation and lectio poetae
all can be found to some degree in his fellow scholars, his « school, » the
times, and in the matter inherited from earlier commentaries.
But of course William reshaped his inheritance into a unique critical
work. The Glosses take their order from the Satires, but William brought
to bear on them a principle of selection of his matter and an intelligent
understanding of the art of his subject. Thus this work is worth examin-
ing for its own merits, not merely as a preservation of inherited matter.
The edition follows the essays. The glosses in the edition follow the
order of W manuscript in the infrequent case that the two manuscripts
preserve different orders. I placed the glosses of W and P in parallel
columns to facilitate comparison and to aid the argument of Chapter One.
I expanded silently all abbreviations, punctuated (following the scribe's
punctuation where possible), and gave sources and analogues wherever
I was able. As editor I found, especially with W, that I had to emend
and change a considerable number of readings because of damage or
confusion in the text. My principle for emendation was to try to preserve
the integrity of the text and context, and to approximate what seemed to
14 GLOSSES TO JUVENAL

me to be the intention of the author - whether student or William of

Conches.

I wish to thank the following people and organizations for their help in the preparation
of this book: Theodore Silverstein, W. Braxton Ross, Winthrop Wetherbee, Nancy Cohen,
Marie Wester, The American Council of Learned Societies, which gave me a grant to aid
in the preparation and publication of this work, the Bibliothèque Nationale, the Bodleian
Library, The Walters Art Gallery, especially the manuscripts librarian Lillian Randall, The
Widener Library of Harvard, and especially the staff of the Regenstein Library at the
University of Chicago. I would like to recall Arthur R. Heiserman, who was my dissertation
advisor and always a great help and inspiration. He died in the middle of this project.
And, finally, thanks go to M. G. Paulhac, Mlle M.-T. D'Alverny, and Librairie philosophique
J. Vrin for their guidance.
 PART ONE

THREE ESSAYS ON THE GLOSSES

AND WILLIAM OF CONCHES

 CHAPTER I

THE TRADITION OF JUVENAL GLOSSES

AND THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE MANUSCRIPTS
OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALIS SATIRAS

It would be difficult to describe with assurance William of Conches'

methods of composition and use of sources without determining, to
whatever extent that is possible, the relationship of the two very different
texts of his Juvenal glosses found in manuscripts Baltimore Walters Art
Gallery 20 (W) and Paris Bibliothèque Nationale Fonds Latin 2904 (P).
The purpose of this chapter therefore is to describe the physical
appearance, state, and date of the manuscripts, and to establish the
apparent relationship of the texts, the degree of interference of scribes
and students, and the nature of his use of certain inherited materials.
We can draw a second purpose for this chapter from our consideration
of William's use of inherited matter. We will describe, within a limited
framework, the nature of the transmission of the matter of Juvenal
glosses, and its effect on individual works. In medieval manuscripts one
of several traditional sets of glosses usually accompanied Juvenal's
Saturae; scribes placed them there to provide scholarly information
concerning the author's life, poetic grammar and diction, and historical
and literary allusions. Such simple glosses provide fundamental
« causes >> for the parts of the texts they explicate because their
explanation supplies a rationale or sense of probability for words, phrases,
and allusions which otherwise may have seemed elusively or arbitrarily
used. The scholia consequently relieve readers' uncertainty and confusion
over such passages . The fundamental dynamic of this genre of
<< practical » criticism, the tradition of Juvenal glosses, is one of inherited
matter, reworked at different times for different audiences, but a matter
fundamentally stable because it is intended to preserve for the satires the
context, and an explanation, of that almost forgotten world.
However, though we accept this dynamic as fundamental to the
scholia and early glosses, we must keep in mind that each major reworking
of the glosses presents us with other major forces in the « making » of
the individual commentary. Individual men, with particular time-oriented

2
18 THE MANUSCRIPTS

critical and scholarly assumptions, reworked inherited matter at different

times for specific audiences. The author is not only a cause in himself,
however potent that may be as an explanation of his selection and
explanation, but he also is a creature of his age, its preoccupations, its
resources. He of course modifies part of his cultural inheritance, just as
he - as we will see - - modifies part of his inherited matter. In a culture
preoccupied with the classics as was twelfth-century France, we can
expect these << practical » critics to offer us not only conventional
information, but in their selection and reworking of it a set of critical
theories, terms, and assumptions, an integrated concept of that distant
but fascinating classical world, and their ethical and philosophical posi-
tions. We should expect William of Conches' commentary to be controlled
by these assumptions to the end of providing for the Satires the range of
causes and explanations necessary for the poetic work to function with
convincing probability. The tradition and its recipient, then, provide a
framework within which to explain the character and relationship of these
three commentaries - the two by William, and one indebted to them,
Oxford Bodleian Library Auct. F 6.9 (B).

Walters Art Gallery Manuscript, and Possible

Theories of Relation

The Glosae in Iuvenalis Satiras survive in two manuscripts, very

different in character and appearance, neither of which appears to be a
complete and finished product. The Baltimore manuscript, Walters Art
Gallery 20, (W), contains the complete text of the « vulgate >> version of
Juvenal's Saturae ¹ , with marginal glosses for the greater part of Satires
One and Two. The text hand is a modified Carolingian minuscule, with
lightly clubbed ascenders, upright d mixed with curved, very round g,
round r, and generally very little angularity or compression. Small s is
mixed with long at word endings, and c is used for the prefix con. The
tironian et is used, and no cedilla appears on the e. The text, therefore,
was probably copied after 1150, but its roundness suggests either a southern
provenance or a scribe's attempt at an older-looking hand. The text
occupies a rather small part of each page, from which we can surmise that
the scribe allowed for the addition of a gloss, and that he also wrote the
text in a formal text hand which would stand out clearly from the sur-
rounding glosses. From the fact that the ink color is similar to and has
faded to a degree equal to that of the text ink, we can conclude that the
interlinear glosses were added either at the time of or soon after the
production of the text.

1. See Ulrich Knoche, ed. , D. Junius Iuvenalis Saturae (München, Hueber, 1950) , pp . 9-34,
A. E. Housman, ed. , D. Iunii Iuvenalis Saturae (Cambridge, University Press, 1931), pp. V-LVIII,
for an explanation of the stemma of Juvenal manuscripts . Basically, the Pithoean and
Bobiensis mss . provide a superior text (P), and all other medieval manuscripts preserve
texts of the more corrupt (though not always inferior) « vulgate or common version. This
<< vulgate » again can be distinguished into several major traditions.
 AND THEIR TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP 19

The book was produced, then, at the earliest about 1150. We find a
text of thirty-five lines to a page, in a book composed of fifty-four parch-
ment folios - 24 cm by 16 cm - hair sides facing, pricked on outer
margins and ruled dry point. The scribe used a brown ink which is now
faded. The manuscript shows little sign of use, though the front folio
is worn and rubbed. Its provenance and history are sketchy. The
manuscript was in the Amiens area in the thirteenth century, later belonged
to Pierre Pithou, the famous Renaissance editor of Juvenal, and came into
the possession of the Walters Art Gallery in Baltimore in 1929 when they
acquired it at a Quaritch sale 2.
Perhaps as much as a quarter century or more later, a scribe in
Northern France copied into the manuscript sections of William of
Conches' glosses on Juvenal's satires. The first W scribe (W-1), not that
of the text, copied the glosses on folios 1r to 3r, stopped with the end of
Satire 1, then recommenced copying on 4r; a second hand (W-2), extremely
different both in its appearance and in its organization of the glosses, began
on 4v and continued to the end of Satire 2. Both scripts suggest a date
in the second half of the twelfth century. Both intermix ci and ti, use an
uncrossed tironian symbol for et, are heavily abbreviated, angular, tend
to prefer uncial d and short s at word end, use an angular g, and allow h
to dip below the line. We should place them more toward the end than
the middle of the century .
The most immediate problem which presents itself is the omission
in W of glosses to Satire 1. 15-40 and Satire 2. 1-64 . Scribe 1 left a blank
space for glosses to lines 2. 1-64 but none for those to 1. 15-40. We will
assume that the scribe did not omit the lines from some moral objection,
and we can propose several hypotheses to explain their omission. First,
the glosses may not have been transmitted or even composed . This
explanation certainly is possible, although we find the glosses of
manuscript P complete for these sections and they are consistent in
character with the other P glosses. A scribe might be able, we could
contend, to draw from William's other works the material which we find
in P. We find no evidence of indebtedness, though, of these glosses either
to William's Timaeus and Boethius glosses, or to the scientific treatises.
However, if the glosses, as we know them, are reportationes of lectures,
it is easily possible that the lectures on these lines were not transcribed or,
if they were, that the transcriptions were in such casual state that they
could be lost or damaged .
Our second hypothesis postulates as an explanation some kind of
damage which occurred to a manuscript - the ancestor of W - that was
not the source of the text of P. The test of this hypothesis is to explain
convincingly how the glosses and text lines 1. 1-14 survived while 1. 15-40 in
some way were damaged. That lines 1. 1-14 were the content of one folio,

2. Apparently Pithou obtained the codex from Antoine Loisel, who owned it around
1570. After Pithou we next find it placed in the Duchesse du Berry's sale in Paris, 1837 (no.
2419) to Bossange. From the Joseph Barrois sale in 1849 (no . 192) it went to Lord Ashburnham;
sold in 1901 (no. 317) to Quaritch. (Information from the Walters Gallery).
20 THE MANUSCRIPTS

and 1. 15-40 the content of the next is possible but somewhat improbable.
The three segments in question: 1. 1-14, 15-40, and 2. 1-64 are of such
different lengths it is hard to visualize them each being either one or two
folios in the same manuscript. It does not appear possible that W's exem-
plar could have had a text of Juvenal with regular numbers of lines per
folio. Of course, W's exemplar could well not have had a text of Juvenal,
which would easily allow for differing numbers of lines glossed on a folio.
It is easier for us, on the other hand, to assume that the other omission,
2. 1-64, covered one full folio, and that that folio was lost or mutilated.
The crux of our hypothesis, then, lies in what happened to the glosses of
Satire 1. 15-40, missing in W.
The explanation most satisfying to us is a combination of several
hypotheses. If scribe W- 1 copied from an exemplar which did not sur-
rounded a text — or did accompany a text but one of much fewer lines
then he would probably find that he did not have enough space on folio
1r of W to contain all of the glosses for Satire 1. 1-35. The scribe W-1
found that he had glossed only the first fifteen lines when he had reached
the bottom of folio 1r. We could argue that some texts were set up by
scribes with a few lines of text followed by the glosses for the lines,
followed by more text, and so on, but the point is either we are dealing
with a manuscript exemplar with a regular number of text lines per page,
or with a manuscript in which the glosses' bulk determines the number
of lines treated per page, regardless of the actual presence of the lines .
Another possibility would be that scribe W-1 copied from a text which
looked much like the glosses of scribe W-2- with heavy interlinear as well
as marginal glossing- and that in re-integrating them found he lacked
space for glosses on 1. 15-40. It seems improbable, however, that rather
extensive glosses could have fitted in between twenty-five lines.
We can conclude, then, that scribes W-1 and W-2 copied from a text
of the glosses which did not surround a text of the Satires, and that
scribe W-1 found that, after abbreviating the glosses, he could not fit them
into the margins, and consequently omitted glosses for those twenty-five
lines. Scribe 2 might then be further selectively abbreviating the glosses
of the exemplar while partially rearranging their order and placing some
between the lines. Also, one or two missing folios account for the
omission of 2. 1-64. The extensive blank space left by scribe W-1 for
glosses on folios 3 and 4 indicates that he was clearly aware that they were
missing, and did not omit them from lack of space. The space also proves
that he was copying from only one exemplar, and most probably not
consulting another set of glosses on Juvenal, which he might easily have
been tempted to substitute.
A closer examination of W, especially folio one, and of the variation
between the glosses on 1. 1-14 in W and P shows us that the editor-scribe,
besides omitting out of necessity the glosses on Satire 1. 15-40, abbreviated
many of the glosses. The scribe was not compelled to do so with the
remainder of he glosses on Satire 1 because they are somewhat briefer
and less numerous. After an extensive accessus which W lacks, we
encounter two distinct versions of what is basically the same introduction
 AND THEIR TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP 21

to Satire 1 in glosses on semper ego auditor tantum. The W gloss is

briefer but includes most of the main elements - that Juvenal does two
things: reprehends bad poets, and shows why he chose this kind of
poetry; and both include a description of the satiric method of attack
Juvenal uses -- too much taciturnity — both as a model of correct com-
portment and an unspoken (though not actually unspoken) indirect attack
on other writers. After this rhetorical explication both glosses present
the complicated analogy, based on vexatus, of mares giving birth with the
aid of vexantes agasones and the difficult birth of satiric outburst. The
two versions have the glosses differently ordered, and P presents a much
abbreviated version with other short gloses .
The order of the glosses on the first ten lines in P is somewhat
confusing. Glosses on certain lines can be found both on page 221 and
222, and the longer and shorter glosses on these lines often are separated.
A possible explanation for this phenomenon is that P scribe found longer
glosses in the margins of his exemplar and shorter glosses interlinear.
Whatever may be the case, at some point in the transmission of P the
scribe allowed the glosses on the first few lines to be separated in terms
of their length, but then integrated the subsequent glosses.
The glosses following in each of the manuscripts appear to have the
same relationship to one another as had those on semper ego and vexatus.
The glosses on togatos include the same core of matter, but those of P are
considerably longer. P omits the summary of the myth of Theseus in the
gloss on Theseide rauci Codri, but both include the elaboration of Virgil's
Eclogues 9. 35-36, with the metaphor of the good and bad poets being like
swans and geese. W omits the long summary of the Orestes myth, and the
disquisition on lucus Martis. Then, after W omits the moral interpretation
of nota est, we find a series of abbreviations by scribe W-1 of the material
on the cave of Vulcan and on the winds. Although W includes a much
longer gloss on the golden fleece, the gloss is confused and apparently the
scribe was copying from a damaged or confused exemplar.
P glosses much more extensively quantas iaculetur and platani Fron-
tonis. With the glosses on platani, marmora, and columne scribe W-1 no
more han briefly noted the sense of William's interpretation. At this
point we are at the bottom of folio 1r where scribe W-1 omitted the
glosses to twenty six verses.
Within the context of the progressive abbreviation of the text of the
glosses by scribe W-1 we must examine two references made by W to
other works of William for their significance. In the gloss on quid agant
venti (p. 99 our text) W reads : << how the winds do those things and
why more in one time of the year than in another, if someone desires to
know, let him > certainly go to > our physica; who was to
be known the author of authors. » ( « quomodo venti agant ista et quare
plus in uno tempore anni quam in alio, si quis scire desiderat nostram
physicam scilicet < adeat > quis auctor fuit sciendum auctorum. » ) In
the gloss on Monychus W reads: << But what Poliphemus signifies , what
Ulisses, in our glosses on Boethius let him find who wants to know this. »
(<< Sed quid significat Poliphemus, quid Ulixes in nostris glosulis super
22 THE MANUSCRIPTS

Boetium inveniet qui hoc scire voluit » [p. 100 our text] ). These are
similar formulas, and both refer specifically to passages in works by
William. But the reference to nostram physicam is confused, with the
verb missing, and at that point the scribe wrote in four words over
others which he had crossed out. It appears that the scribe here either
copied from a confused exemplar and tried to correct it, or added his own
comment; either case would argue strongly that W was interfering with
the text.
In a similar first person manner W cuts short the long scientific
descriptions found in P with « hoc mihi est notum » (pp. 97, 98, 100 our
text). This phrase comes slightly changed, of course, from Juvenal ( 1. 7)
but it also is in keeping with William's frequent ambiguous use of the
first person and is a convenient formula of abbreviation. We find a case
quite similar, to the ones just cited, in the Compendium philosophiae
(called by some scholars the Tertia philosophia) which has been ascribed
to William. If we accept Tullio Gregory's conclusion that the first two
chapters represent a revision of William's Philosophia by a disciple³, then
we find that the references in the Compendium to « nostris glosulis super
Boetium >» 4, were made not by William himself but by a scribe or a disci-
ple. Such evidence suggests that scribes and students from time to time
used the first person in texts when referring to other works by their
teacher.
This problem cannot be indisputably resolved, for we cannot finally
say whether or not these phrases were in W's exemplar. We confront
here a question of probability within a context of facts. We know the
W scribes faced a problem of lack of space, we note scribal interference
and composition in the reference to the Philosophia, we see a progressive
shortening of glosses towards the bottom of folio 1r, and we see a
pattern of abbreviation by using the first person. A similar case appears
in the Compendium philosophie. Within this context and, as we will find
later, noting the fact that the length of glosses in P and W for the
remainder of Satire 1 is quite similar, we can argue that scribe W-1 did
progressively abbreviate the glosses because of lack of space, and used
these formulas in the first person to refer readers to the material available
in other of William's writings.
Scribe W-1, therefore, apparently interfered quite extensively with the
text he received. We should not, however, depend on this hypothesis to
explain all of the variations of the text in W and P. There appear to be
much more fundamental causes of the differences between the two texts,
and one can indisputably assert that the two texts represent different
versions which result from a comprehensive reworking of the matter.
Three basic explanations are possible. First, either William or another
scholar revised one to produce the other, either as a lecture copy or as a

3. Tullio Gregory, « Sull'attribuzione a Guglielmo di Conches di un rimaneggiamento

della Philosophia mundi », Giornale critico della filosofia Italiano, 3rd ser, 5 ( 1951 ) , 119-25.
4. Carmelo Ottaviano, ed. , « Un brano inedito della Philosophia di Guglielmo di
Conches », in Archivio di storia della filosofia 1 ( 1932) , 133-145, and 2 ( 1933), 16-51; see p. 57.
 AND THEIR TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP 23

more formal work. Second, William at one time probably gave a set of
lectures on Juvenal (perhaps even several times), and a reportatio (or
several) resulted. Third, one text may represent the author's polished
text and the other a reportatio.
These hypotheses are attractive for their powers of explanation and
for the significance of the implications of their explanations, and they
each have external evidence for support. It is well known that William
of Conches extensively revised his De philosophia mundi, his Macrobius
and Priscian glosses, to a lesser extent the Timaeus glosses, and the
Dragmaticon (which in itself is a revision of the Philosophia) 5. On the
other hand, Theodore Silverstein and Mile d'Alverny have suggested that
the two differing texts of Bernard Silvester's Commentary on the First
Six Books of the Aeneid represent student lecture notes which circulated
separately. The suggestion could apply as well to the Juvenal glosses.
The lecture notes theory accounts for close similarity of major interpre-
tations in and organization of the glosses while allowing for the shorter,
more commonplace glosses to be in the main the work of a student. The
lecture notes theory also provides an explanation for the difference of the
texts without demanding the far more elaborate one of extensive revision,
for two students will naturally word their transcriptions differently, but
one author-revisor must have a strong motivating reason for exhaustively
recasting a work. Though modern scholars have provided no pre-
cedent for it, our third possibility both retains the strengths of the lecture
notes theory and explains the difference between a rather informal, more
note-like reportatio and a formal, rhetorical work.
Our choice of one explanation must rest, ultimately, on the evidence
we find preserved for us in the two manuscripts. Whichever explanation
we choose we must keep in mind W scribe I's meddling and methods of
abbreviation, and tailor our theory either to fit this concept or refute it.

The Paris Manuscript and the Possibility

of Direct Revision

Paris Bibliothèque Nationale Fonds Latin 2904 (P) is a small, thick

manuscript 180 mm by 135 mm, 263 pages, containing many different
and apparently unrelated texts, in different hands and irregular gatherings.
It is a collection of texts and fragments copied and composed separately
which was brought together early - late thirteenth or early fourteenth
century--as a volume in the library of the monastery of Volasse or
Voeux, of the Bishopric of Rouen 6.
The Paris manuscript contains these items: pages 1-110 letters of
Hildebertus Cenomanensis; following them are the Gemma aurea of

5. André Vernet, « Un remaniement de la Philosophia de Guillaume de Conches »,

Scriptorium 1 (1947), 243-59, also Edouard Jeauneau, ed, Guillaume de Conches Glosae
Super Platonem (Paris, J. Vrin, 1965), introduction pp. 6-9.
6. Paris. Bibliothèque nationale, Département des manuscrits, Catalogue général des
manuscrits latins (Paris, Bibliothèque nationale, 1939- ),v, 3 , (1954).
24 THE MANUSCRIPTS

Henricus Francigena ( 111-118 ), glosses on Lucan ( 119-144), Saint Jerome's

Liber interpretationis hebraicorum nominorum ( 145-152), fragments of
Neckham's Fabulae ( 153-57), a collection of sermons ( 155-162 ) , a fragment
of a commentary on the Psalms ( 163-165), a fragment of Isidore's Etymo-
logiae (166-170), a sequence by Adam of Saint Victor and one for Holy
Wednesday (179-181 ), some medical formulas (183), Saint Anselm's De
processione Spiritus Sancti ( 187-199), Alcuin's Dialogus de dialectica (200-
215), Saint Augustine's Ad Macedonium (216), fragments on the vices
and virtues ( 171-179, 217-218 ), a fragment of a rhetoric (219-220), William
of Conches' Glosae in Juvenalis Satiras (221-239) , glosses on the Eclogues
of Virgil (241-51 ), and a table, on paper, of the letters of Hildebert (253-257).
The preponderance of trivium texts - rhetorics and dialectics — and of
commentaries and fable collections in this manuscript indicates that it is,
at least in part, a student collection. The texts most likely were written
down and used elsewhere but were collected and bound at the monastery
of Volasse.
From my own examination of P, I found nine groups of gatherings
and texts which were distinct: pages 1-110, 111-118, 119-144, 145-155, 156-
170, 171-185, 187-218, 219-239, and 241-251 ; the final group, 253-257, is on
paper and was sewn in much later. The binding is rather humble. The
bookbinder, apparently not willing to waste a piece of parchment, sewed
up a tear in the vellum before stretching it over the boards. The different
sections vary greatly in script and age, and the binder made no attempt
to cut the sections to an equal size.
The Juvenal glosses were written by one scribe on two irregular
gatherings (pages 221-232, and 233-240). The glosses , without an
accompanying text, cover the first book of Juvenal's Saturae and then
break off after glossing 6. 90. It is a very small, angular, and fully gothic
script, which uses the tironian uncrossed et, the division sign for est,
long s almost exclusively at line end, and uncial and straight-back d
indiscriminately. The scribe used ci often in place of ti, and the uprights
are turned. With the advice of Me M.-T. d'Alverny I would date the
manuscript in the second half of the twelfth century, and the Juvenal
glosses in the last quarter of the century. Mile d'Alverny places its
production somewhere in northern France.
With the beginning of the second gathering (P, p. 233) the nature of
the commentary in P changes. The glosses on the first two satires and
the first third of satire 3 are a mixture somewhat selective - of long
and short comments. With page 233, however, the glosses become
increasingly briefer, and those treating Satires 4, 5, and 6, are seldom
more than a few words each. The glosses of P's second gathering
resemble interlinear glosses, and for that matter probably are.
For the purpose of comparing the two versions of the glosses we
will describe their general characteristics as well as those which are
distinctive for each. In this way we can compare them as wholes after
which we can compare their parts. P, in general, is fuller in its treatment
of many of the passages which both texts gloss, and gives much more
detailed explanations of natural science phenomena. P certainly shows
 AND THEIR TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP 25

more careful organization of its explications and often is clearer than

W in its interpretations. W seems to have a number of muddled passages.
W, on the other hand, tends more to emphasize historical and mythical
explanation, it gives a number of somewhat formulaic poetic definitions,
more frequently uses a question-answer format, and is often briefer
- having a note-like quality — and even at times has the appearance of a
shortened redaction.
These distinctions, though, are matters of emphasis, for neither text
totally neglects what the other stresses. The two texts certainly are from
a single unique matter, the teachings of William of Conches, and preserve
it in similar form. The Glosae are literary, moral explication of the
Satires, and they closely involve themselves with text and its sense. We
can easily distinguish them from such compendiums of Platonic meta-
physics as Macrobius' Commentary on the Dream of Scipio, from outlines
of the seven arts as we find in the commentary of Ranulf of Longchamp
on the Anticlaudianus, from the traditional scholia of classical authors.
William's glosses are very Chartrian and very much his own.
We should now weigh our hypotheses against each version's general
characteristics and test them against evidence in specific passages. As
we search for the most probable of the possibilities we should consider
external evidence - such as evidence of revision in William's other work-
and traditions of classical scholarship.
In considering the hypothesis of revision we see these possibilities :
a full authorial revision, a partial authorial revision, and a full revision by
some other person. It would seem to me, though, that the evidence does
not show sufficient cause or motivation for complete revision. We
assume, probably correctly, that in undertaking such fundamental
reworking - recasting every sentence and many ideas- an author would
be seeking a thoroughly better text, or a radical shift of emphasis (either
because he changed his opinions, as in the Dragmaticon, or his interests),
or a new purpose for the work. W does not present the characteristics
of either a consistent redaction of P or a paraphrase whereas P does not
show consistent evidence of an expansion of W. We earlier noted, though,
that scribe W-1 redacted or abbreviated his exemplar. Since the two
texts do not reveal a change fundamental enough to support such causes,
we can rule out full revision. On the other hand, we cannot totally exclude
the possibility of a partial revision by William, for the master appears to
have done so with most of his works, leaving large portions of the text
untouched but changing important passages.
We must at this point consider the available evidence for William's
revisions of his works. In two revisions, the Dragmaticon and the glosses
on Priscian, William stated in the preface to each that the work indeed
was his revision, and provided a rationale for so doing. In the Dragma-
ticon William reshaped the Philosophia's matter to make a teaching
dialogue; in it he retracted opinions not consonant with the Faith, and
he treated more extensively ( than he had done in the Philosophia) the
mathematical and physical calculus of the stars and heavens. While the
most famous changes found in the Dragmaticon concern the identification
26 THE MANUSCRIPTS

of the anima mundi with the Holy Spirit, and the location of waters
above the stars, Y. V. O'Neill demonstrated significant changes in and
additions to the work's medical section 7. The changes reflect much
wider reading but also certain changes of opinion.
On the other hand, the revisions in Priscian glosses are not thorough-
going either in the manner of the Dragmaticon or the Juvenal glosses.
Apparently, according to Eduoard Jeauneau 8, large segments of the text
remain intact, but William made various additions and revisions of
passages. We see this method of revision also in the Boethius and the
Macrobius glosses. Peter Dronke gives in Fabula ' variants for passages
he cites from the Macrobius glosses which he suggests are William's own
work, and describes the variations manuscript to manuscript in William's
gloss as a series of partial authorial revisions. He claims, in another
place 10, William revised the Boethius glosses in a passage where some
manuscripts identify the anima mundi with the Holy Spirit. These
revisions reflect, of course, a shift of theological position.
The revisions in J.-M. Parent's La doctrine de la création dans
l'école de Chartres 11 show an interesting continuity of method and are
not merely rearrangements of phrases. Paris BN Latin 6406 represents
the revision, Troyes 1381 the standard text. Paris for pages 125 11. 2-9
rearranges the Troyes text - the Troyes line « Sed dicendum est eterna >»
is basically the same as Paris « uno modo ... pro eterno. » Troyes cites
grammarian's definitions of eternum and perpetuum, then identifies a
rhetorical figure (use of perpetua for eterna); Paris first gives the
rhetorical argument, ignores the grammatical concerns, and gives two
logical explanations for its use of perpetua. Thus the two versions are
different in nature, and Paris, in omitting the grammatical definitions,
could be a revision of the other.
Paris on page 126 gives an extensive revision and omits grammatical
material - here, short glosses - for a sustained logical analysis of the
relation of time and eternity. Again, on page 127 the revisor cut out many
of the straightforward definitions and concentrated on the cause of the
creation of the world, ignoring digressions on the different kinds of
artificers and making.
The pattern of revision, then, is one of omission of basic definitions
(many of which are not immediately applicable) and the concerns of
grammarians, and focussing closer on the argument. If William is the

7. Ynez V. O'Neill, « William of Conches' Description of the Brain », Clio Medica 3

(1967), 203-223, esp. 221-223 .
8. Edouard Jeauneau, Lectio Philosophorum : Recherches sur l'école de Chartres
(Amsterdam, Hakkert, 1973) , pp . 218-19.
9. Peter Dronke, Fabula : Explorations into the Uses of Medieval Platonism (Leiden,
E. J. Brill, 1974), pp. 68-78.
10. Idem, « L'amor che move il sol... » Studi Medievali 6¹ (1965), 412.
11. Jean-Marie Parent, La doctrine de la création dans l'école de Chartres (Paris-Ottawa ,
Institut d'études médiévales d'Ottawa, 1938), pp. 124-136. Pierre Paul Courcelle in his La
Consolation de Philosophie dans la tradition littéraire (Paris, Études augustiniennes, 1967),
pp. 117-119, disputes Parent's opinion that the two manuscripts represent a revision; but
I feel Parent's position is persuasive.
 AND THEIR TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP 27

revisor - for Dronke would suggest << among the manuscripts of his
commentaries there tend to be differences too substantial to be due to
the vagaries of copying, and often too significant to be thought of as
inaccurate rewordings by students or disciples » 12- then we have evidence
of his method of revision and can test other possible revisions against
the evidence. The Macrobius glosses and the Dragmaticon provide the
balance of the evidence. As we will see later, the two texts of the Juvenal
glosses do not present a process of revision which resembles those we
have characterized above.
For our second major hypothesis -— the lecture notes theory — we find
it possible either that they are two sets of lecture notes of the same
lecture series, taken by two different students, or they are reportationes
of two different lecture series, which in a sense assumes a kind of spoken
revision by William. Our third hypothesis is the single possibility of one
text being a reportatio, the other the author's published text.
It is difficult to describe the characteristics which we might look for
in a reportatio. Pare in his study La Renaissance du XII Siècle claims
that they were careful transcripts of an author's lecture and not simply
personal notes 13. If such is the case, then we could ask why the two
texts are so different if they are reportationes of one lecture series. We
can, on the other hand, argue that while the ordinary university lectures
(mainly theology, logic, and some « sciences » ) resulted in such accurate
publications , extraordinary series of lectures, which would probably have
included such a topic as Juvenal's Satirae, most likely had no such
procedure for publication, and that any reportatio resulting from an
extraordinary lecture series would be personal notes of a student 14. If
such is the case, P is much too polished a work to be personal lecture
notes.
Returning to our first possibility, we might propose that P represents
a student's revision of his personal lecture notes. Again we have the
problem , though, of the motive for a full revision, but in this case the
revision theory is more probable because we would not have to account
for a revision of W but of P's progenitor. With the evidence of B the
St. Victor compilation, however, which is possibly thirty years prior to P,
we can argue that P ancestor was probably in its present state when B
was produced 15. Thus, if such a revision occurred it happened quite early,
before mid-century.
Our second possible explanation may be more probable, if we can
assume that William gave two lecture series. This possibility explains
the different length of the texts, the different emphases and formats, and
the P. accessus, but it assumes that William informally revised while

12. Dronke, Fabula, pp. 14-15.

13. G. Paré, et al., La Renaissance du XIIe siècle : les écoles et l'enseignement (Ottawa,
Institut d'études médiévales d'Ottawa, 1933), p. 92.
14. Hastings Rashdall, The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, ed . Maurice
Powicke, 2 vols., 2nd ed. (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1936) , 1, 490 .
15. See below, pp . 41-43.
28 THE MANUSCRIPTS

lecturing, and that the two versions represent his own changes with some
student additions.
Our third hypothesis is a satisfying and probable explanation. W
shows evidence of conclusion where P is clear, W often uses the quaestio
format, and W's glosses are briefer and more note-like. P is more
elaborate than we would expect a student reportatio to be, longer, more
formal.
By a process of elimination we are left with four possibilities. First,
the two versions may embody partial revision by William himself. Second,
they could be two reportationes of one lecture series, one of which was
extensively revised. Third, they could be reportationes of two different
lecture series by William. Fouth, one text may be the author's published
text, the other a reportatio. We will now examine the texts for evidence
of such possibilities.

Comparison of Texts

The most striking difference between W and P is the unique accessus

to P. In itself the addition of an accessus is of little significance, for
Jourdain notes that the manuscripts of William's Boethius glosses also
differ in this aspect 16. However, since the manuscript has the look of a
student collection the fact that a student apparently wrote the accessus
suggests the whole work may be a student text. We know that this
accessus was not written - at least in the state in which it now exists
by William of Conches because the author cites a certain Master Bernard
and William of Conches:

There are those who value asking both in this and in other authors
to what part of philosophy they may be subjoined . In truth
Master Bernard said that this is not to be sought in authors
when they themselves treat neither the parts of philosophy nor
concerning philosophy. Master William of Conches says all
authors, however much they may be neither the parts of philosophy
nor treat concerning it, are to be subjoined to philosophy on account
of what matter > they treat, and all are to be subjoined to that
part of philosophy on account of what < matter > they treat.

Sunt qui querendum existiment et in hoc et in aliis auctoribus

cui parti philosophie subponantur. Magister vero Bernardus
dicebat hoc non esse in auctoribus querendum cum ipsi nec partes
philosophie nec de philosophia tractant. Magister Wilelmus de
Conchis dicit auctores omnes quamvis nec partes sint philosophie
nec de ipsa agant, philosophie suponi propter quam tractant, et
omnes illi parti philosophie suponi, propter quam tractant (p. 89
our text ).

16. Charles Jourdain, Notices et extraits des manuscrits de la bibliothèque impériale 20,
pt. 2 (Paris, 1862), 40-42.
 AND THEIR TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP 29

The passage above relates a Chartrian conflict of opinion over the form
of an accessus but even more it preserves two Chartrian masters' disa-
greement over the character of poetic works, their effect, and their place
in the curriculum. The student contrived a resolution for the dispute:
<< Each reading, therefore is true; authors are subjoined to philosophy,
that is, on account that they treat ethics, which is a part of philosophy,
so that certainly they might furnish moral instruction, and authors are
not subjoined to philosophy, that is, they are not its parts. » ( « Utraque
lectio ergo vera est; auctores supponuntur philosophie, id est propter
ethicam, que est pars philosophie, tractant, ut scilicet moralem comparent
instructionem, et auctores non suponuntur philosophie, id est non sunt
eius partes. ») The solution is rather artificial and conventional, but it is
true to the nature of William's Glosae. Its concern with causes of the
work- in the tradition of the Aristotelian causes - prepares us for the
often reiterated « alia causa est quare scribat, » of the glosses .
We cannot state with complete certainty what influence William had
on this accessus, but we can draw some conclusions concerning it and its
sources. It is well written and not the product of a scribe or immature
student, and it was not a common set-piece taken from other commen-
taries. Neither the ancient scholia nor the major medieval commentaries
show much resemblance to the P accessus; the vita alone takes a few
phrases from the scholia. We must allow, however, that P owes its
etymologies of satira to the Diomedian tradition and to Macrobius'
Saturnalia, but the author's elaboration of the analogy between the
etymologies of satira and the nature of the genre is quite original and
skillful 17.
The author of the accessus ignored the familiar Diomedian etymologies
of a sausage and the lex satura, and treats extensively- and meta-
phorically - the satyr-satire analogy briefly dismissed by Diomedes. And
though P mentions lanx, its explanation of the etymology is not that of
Diomedes. The sources of P accessus, then, are neither the Juvenal
commentary tradition nor that of Diomedes, other than in the most
cursory way. Since the extensive treatment of satira has no classical
or well known medieval source, it can be argued that William, cited by
name in the accessus, or the school at Chartres, is the source for much
of the accessus.
Most important, we should note that whereas the author of the
accessus reports Master Bernard's opinion in the imperfect tense, he cites
William in the present tense-- « dicit. >> This fact, along with the heavy
indebtedness of B's accessus to P, suggests that the accessus was written
while William was still teaching, and that the controversy is taken from
William's own teaching, in which he related the position of his own
Master, Bernard . This conclusion strengthens the probability that the
accessus as a whole depends on William's teaching.

17. On the matter of sources I wish to thank Prof. Peter White, of the University of
Chicago, for his advice.
30 THE MANUSCRIPTS

The glosses on the first five lines of Juvenal establish what becomes
a characteristic relationship between the two texts. The two texts present
basically the same argument, and the introductory gloss shows many
similarities of phrasing. W is more compact, even spare; P elaborates,
adds, is more polished and rhetorical. Would it be impossible or
improbable for one logically to become the other ? The « interfering
scribe » of W explains the direction of abbreviation, but it does not
explain the difference in wording and the omission of brief yet important
sentences. In the first gloss, a short introduction to the satire, P alone
explains why he reprehends prolix writers, that the satire is a prologue to
the work, and that he begins with an indignant, satiric cry. With these
extra passages P introduces new material, but it is difficult to say which
direction change occurred between P and W in this gloss.
The gloss on reponam reverses the situation, for the metaphor of
pregnant mares is explained fully in W, but rather more briefly presented
in P. Perhaps W's greater detail grows out of its emphasis on causes of
satire and on poetic (as distinguished from rhetorical) questions.
With the subsequent glosses on togatos, margine, and necdum finitus
the situation is much as it was in the first gloss. W's glosses are brief,
concise, more concerned with rudimentary poetic definitions and clear
explanations. P is almost prolix with etymologies and grammatical
questions. But their arguments are almost identical, and they are working
with very similar matter. We conclude that W omitted the long Horestes
gloss because of lack of space.
The first gloss which suggests an irreversible direction of revision or
a distinction between student and author text is that on nota mihi magis
(p. 96, our text). W employs the question-answer format, confuses first
and third person, and W's answer, while it explains the basis of the poet's
assurance (again, an aspect of the cause of the satiric attack), leaves
incompletely formulated what P clearly enunciates: the poet presents his
credentials by commending himself as logician, natural scientist, and poet.
William at this point explains the organization as well as the sense of the
poem; W's failure to transmit this analysis clearly does not result from
scribal confusion or redaction . The character of this gloss in W leads
us to believe it is the outgrowth of a lecture, both because of its question-
answer format, and because of its garbling of the larger organizational
analysis. W and P part ways with the next two glosses, with W concerned
with poetry and the function of philosophy and P explaining etymologies
and equating sua domus with the poet's private conscience.
With physica we come to what was William's essential interest. W
cut short the very extensive glosses in P to antrum Vulcani, quid agant
venti, and occursus, but referred us to « nostram physicam »; the cor-
responding passages in the De philosophia are very close. Here again
we wonder in which direction the change occurred: did P merely copy
the material out of the De philosophia ? First, it seems more probable
that W omitted this in keeping with its tendency of abbreviation. Second,
the P text is not completely faithful to De philosophia III, 10 but omits
certain significant words and phrases. These omissions indicate either
 AND THEIR TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP 31

that P scribe revised the De philosophia text, or received them from its
manuscript tradition. Third, P's relative closeness to the De philosophia
shows no similarity to the characteristic difference between P and W: if
P is a revision of W, why did it not revise these passages in the same
manner as others of W? In fact, the closeness of the P-Philosophia texts
argues for an accurate, truthful P manuscript tradition, and that both W
and P manuscript traditions are independent witnesses of some sort to
William's work on Juvenal.

De philosophia Mundi III, 10 Glosae in Iuvenalem , P ms

Ex motu vero aer calefactus transit Aer vero calefactus, in igneam se

in igneam substantiam, fitque cor-
ruscatio: que quamvis cum fragore
fiat, citius tamen ad nos pervenit,
quia visus velocior est auditu. Cum
ergo, sicut prediximus, sparsim ex
fumo humido spissati generantur,
impetus qui ascendit sursum , est
fragor sine fulmine
transit et fit corruscatio que quam-
vis cum fragore fiat, citius tamen
ad nos pervenit quia visus velocius
est auditu. In predicto partium
aeris occursu generatur quidam
occursus impetus quo sursum
accendente sine fulmine est fragor.
Deorsum aut tendente,

Si vero in hac inferiore parte aeris, ... Multo aut humore in hac supe-
multus sit humor, aer existens, in riore parte existente, aer existens
illo impetu igniri non potest in impetu generato non potest
igniri
Non est fulmen igitur lapidea Quidam tamen asserunt fulmen
substantia, ut quidam asserunt ; si esse lapideam substantiam
enim lapidea esset substantia , ... Sed
quia quorumdam est sententia ,
quoddam fulmen esse lapideam
substantiam, ne ex ignorantia vel
invidia videamur eam vituperasse,
vel tacuisse , breviter illud decla-
remus sive exponamus

Aiunt isti, quod cum fumus humidus et est istorum sententia quod fumo
ad superna ascendit, proprium humido ascendente ad superiora,
namque est fumi humidi ... elevatur causa illa aliquid ...

In my opinion, because of the omission of the long rejection of the second

opinion on fulmen, P scribe did not directly copy this text from the De
philosophia because a scribe would have been more faithful to the text,
and would not, without giving good reason, have omitted the rejection.
Thus P did not copy out this text because he had seen the reference to
it in his exemplar, or the exemplar of W. I would assert that such was
the case for all scribes of manuscripts in P family, and that this text was
in P family manuscripts from the beginning of this version of the glosses.
32 THE MANUSCRIPTS

Would William of Conches have omitted his own rejection of the

second fulmen theory ? Although P reads tamen we can hardly take that
to be a rejection of this second opinion, and we know William held his
opinion both in 1124 (the De philosophia) and 1147 (the Dragmaticon),
so P does not represent a change of opinion. Most probably whoever
composed the P version wanted to give the reader several opinions, one
preferable, the other held by others; a student might do so, but if this is
an edition of William's gloss would he omit the author's opinion ? Possibly,
but we might argue that the only person who would feel enough authority
to omit the passages in question would be William himself. The question
is crucial but not easily resolved. Ultimately we must ask, why would a
revisor other than William revise this passage so differently than he had
done with other passages we find in W and P ? We will consider this
question again for the revision of the Boethius glosses.
In its gloss on devehat furtive auream, W in a rather garbled manner
recounts the tale of Frixus and Hellus. We have noted other points at
which W is confused; such is the case later with the gloss on ardeat ira.
Scribe W-1, however, was not a sloppy scribe, or one given to mistakes,
so we can conclude that the confusion was in the exemplar. Take, for
example, the ardeat ira gloss. W substitutes ocula for colera (oculus is
masculine ) in a sentence in which the substitution would make little sense.
P gives a briefer but clearer version. A scribe would have no good reason
to substitute ocula for rubera colera, and the difficulty of the reading
suggests scribe W-1 copied what he saw in his exemplar. We should ask,
does the manuscript tradition of W include these difficult passages from its
inception ? For the most part, Scribe W-1 does not give evidence of
confusing these passages.
From this point (furtive auream ) though the glosses on 1. 15 W gives
very brief explanations. In the gloss on quantas iaculetur W refers to the
Boethius glosses, and we find in manuscript Paris BN Latin 14380 fol. 92r
a similar gloss, but the P version is much less close to the Boethus gloss
than P had been earlier to the De philosophia. The glosses on Polyphemus
are as follows (Boethius, De consolatione philosophiae, Bk. IV, meter 7;
Juvenal, Saturae 1. 15).

Paris BN Latin 14380, 92r

hucusque oratus est per historiam

inde hortatur per integumentum
et primum per Ulixem et Polifemum
et primum videamus fabulam.
Demum illius veritate inlegitur
in fabulis quia Ulixes rediens
de Troia, id est a veris erravit,
et multa adversa sustinuit. qui
de t ... erraret. Venit ad antrum
Poliphemus qui t ... t lucit celum,
habens in fronte.
 AND THEIR TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP 33

Socios illius devoravit, sed post ea Paris BN 2904, p. 223

ab Ulixe oculo privatus est ; cuius
rei veritas est talis : Poliphemus
interpretatur predans famam et
polus pro superbia pueri, quia victi
de fama sed de voluntate curat.
Unde bene dicitur ... Unum oculum
habere in fronte quia illa super-
bia ... habens rationis et intriscus
solum habet corporeum sensum et
in fronte et in ostentatione super-
bie, unde ex frontes dictatur qui sine
pudore sunt. Hic Polifemus socios
illius devorat sed ab Ulixe cecatur
quia puerilis superbia prudentes
semper. Ac qui socii sunt Ulixis
ut superius exponitum est in illis
versibus, scilicet ucia naricii, sed
ab Ulixe, id est sapiente cecatur
cum puerilis superbia sepiam con-
funditur. Quid interpretatur Ulixes
in predictis versibus expositum est ...
Vel melius Monicus dictus est Poli-
femus ab unitate oculi quia unicum
oculum habebat in fronte. Hic
gigas unus legitur fuisse habitans
iuxta litus maris; hic multos socio-
rum Ulixis devoraverat et dum die
quadam in antro suo dormiret
terebravit ei oculum; postea abfugit,
Polifemus vero non videns eum
non potuit aprehendere. Sed post
ipsum cepit ornos iaculari et hoc
quippe quod ita de Polifemo legitur.
Fabulosa est non fabula, subestque
veritas argumento. Polifemus enim,
quasi puerilis visus, superbia est,
quia videtur puero quod multa et
sciat et videat. Unde solum ocu-
lum habet scilicet solam considera-
tionem temporalium, id est in osten-
tatione quia pueri anima ad osten-
tationem et iactantiam facit. Ulixes
vero puerilis superbie oculum
carpat, quia sapiens qui Ulixes est
quasi olonxeon dicitur, id est om-
nium perigrinus, quoniam hic pere-
grinatio est, ille considerationem
temporalium et appetitum contemp-
nit.

BN 14380 and P give the same veritas, but clearly one gloss is not copied
from the other. It would be very difficult to say that either is a direct
revision or redaction of the other, but again the similarity of interpretation
demands that we account for their common material source. Rather than
a revision, P version has the character of something reproduced from
memory, but reproduced more skillfully and with more assurance than
we would expect of a scribe. We can conclude, then, either that William
reproduced the text from memory for his authorial version of the glosses,
or that a student did the same for his personal reportatio, or that William
revised it while lecturing.
After glossing Satire 1. 15 W omits twenty-five lines; when W resumes
at line 1. 41 much the same relationship holds between the texts of W
and P as we have seen to this point. Through page 127 of our text the
contents of the two manuscripts are for the most part quite similar, and
through page 140 - the end of the glosses on Satire 1 - there remain
enough similarities between them for us to conclude that the glosses
34 THE MANUSCRIPTS

embody the same material. With the glosses on Satire 2, however, we

find a much looser relationship between W and P. A missing leaf at some
point in the W manuscript tradition, probably in W's exemplar, accounts
for W's omission of glosses on the first sixty-four lines of Satire 2. After
W resumes the glosses, we are confronted in W, after some glosses in hand
W-1, with a completely different, and disorderly, organization in a second
hand. Both hands copied from the same exemplar because (cursive) : W-2
placed between the lines on the verso side some glosses which (book) hand
W-1 integrated into the order of the marginal glosses on the recto. Per-
haps part of the initial disorder of scribe W-2 resulted from his difficulties
with transferring the glosses of his exemplar, which did not have a text of
Juvenal, to fit around and between the text lines.
We will now examine glosses on Satire 2 typical of the new relation-
ship between W and P. At first the glosses — W resumes on page 146 of our
text- are completely distinct. W is disorderly and brief, but with glosses
on redimicula and monilia the two texts show significant similarities in
content and phrasing; as the glosses proceed W becomes less complete
and P the more extensive. A good example of the relationship of many of
Satire 2 glosses is that on O proceres censore (2. 121 ) :

W P

cum aliud contingebat contra natu- Antiqui solebant censores et arus-

ram confugiebant rationi ad arus-
pices, ut scirent quid hoc signaret.
Si non erat contra naturam, ad
censores ut illud iudicarent et
corrigerent. Est igitur summa cum
talia fiant; est nobis aruspice opus
an censore cum
pices et de t ... † consuetudinem
fiebant; intromitebant se censores,
et ea corrigebant de his, vero que
contingebant contra naturam iudi-
cabant aruspices.Et postea futura
predicebant, et ergo ostendat Iuve-
nalis predicta fieri que natura
querit sub interrogatione quo sit
opus censore an aruspice, quasi
diceret non est opus censore sed
aruspice, quia hec fiunt contra
naturam et vere contra naturam

P is for the most part clearer and fuller than W, but to hypothesize that
P is an explanation of W is unsatisfactory, for though it is rearranged,
fuller, clearer, it does not act as a gloss to the gloss in W. P alone consi-
ders the rhetorical mode ( as is the case generally) of the gloss, suggesting
that Nature herself asks the question. Such an interpretation may be
implicit in the last sentence of W. We can characterize W as a set of
notes, rather brief, and P as a fuller, more polished, rhetorically-oriented
presentation of the same material.
A considerable number of the glosses of W and P for Satire 2 show
such a relationship, but we cannot ignore overall the large differences of
quantity and character. We have only to examine page 158-162 (our text)
 AND THEIR TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP 35

to understand the considerable difference in quantity of glosses; the matter

of difference in character is more difficult to assess. Pages 161-162 seem
typical of such differences. The sense of the first half of each gloss on
vicit is close, but W shifts to description of the weapons while P provides
further alternative opinions. P alone covers fully the following lines-
lustravit, generosior, Pauli, and so forth. Both treat ad podium, and
agree on a reference to Nero, and the construction of the sentence (and
that for munere) is similar, but significantly distinct:

W P

Diceret aliquis non eum generosior sed ipso Nerone ostendit eum
omnibus illis quis ibi erat Nero nobiliorem ...
et ideo subiungit

munere ... et per hoc innuit Neronem munere ... quia ab ipso Nerone
qui muneribus ad hoc illum coegit munus accepit ideo ut gladiator
pugnaret

W procedes by a modified question-answer format, but P relies on a straight

declarative formula. Both take their construction from the text of
Juvenal, but their use of different comparative adjectives makes what
seems quite similar glosses actually somewhat distinct.
After these glosses P alone provides a long segment of text. The
subsequent gloss on esse aligues, which W treats as a myth integument,
P summarizes briefly. W's text is rough and at several points confused,
but it is a brief but typical Conchian myth interpretation.
We can propose several hypotheses to explain why W and P become
much less similar, and why P includes much more material: P could
simply be adding material found elsewhere, or W could be omitting
glosses under the pressure of lack of space, or both could be following
their separate manuscript traditions. We have concluded earlier that
scribes W-1 and W-2 were copying from a single exemplar, and that they
seemed to be copying rather accurately. It could be possible that W is
selective because of lack of space. We can assume that the single P
scribe probably did not initiate this pronounced difference, or for that
matter the scribes in P family, in part because the nature of P does not
change with Satire 2, though at times the reference to secundum alios is
not typical of William , and in part because if P or its exemplar were a
revisor there would be no reason to change its method of revision with
Satire 2. We can conclude either that the change occured with W with
the new scribe, or that the nature of the two commentaries is true to
their separate manuscript traditions.
The two conclusions most likely are both true. P itself is not a
revision of W because of the lines missing in W. W itself is not a revision
of P because of passages which are unclear, and because there is no
reason for W omitting 2.1-64 which are present in P. We can conclude
36 THE MANUSCRIPTS

that the manuscript traditions of W and P likewise were independent

back to their inceptions. We base this conclusion on the fact that P
preserves an accurate and yet significantly revised version of the De
Philosophia 3, ch. 10 (the quid agant venti gloss) which indicates the P
tradition was one of accurate and faithful scribes. We can argue inde-
pendence of their traditions also because the ancestors of P preserve
better readings which most likely could not be reconstructed from a W
ancestor, (and there was no reason, considering the other direction, W
should have made them so confused), because the ancestor of P would
have no reason for changing so abruptly his process of revision with
Satire 2, and because if the ancestor of P, had confronted (if the ancestor
of W had it) references to the physica and the Boethius glosses, the
scribe would most likely have copied it exactly and not introduced the
changes we find. Our only satisfactory conclusion to explain these facts,
as well as the lack of a principle of revision, is that the traditions, back
to their inceptions, of W and P remained independent.
We can conclude, then that W is a text redacted by W's scribes, drawn
from an exemplar which lacked a Juvenal text, had rough and confused
passages, preserved some incompletely developed glosses, was missing
a leaf, used a quaestio format frequently, and often is more compressed
and note-like. I would suggest that W represents a version of a student
reportatio - an informal report of William's lectures on Juvenal - and
I would argue that the exemplar of W either was the original manuscript
of this reportatio, or preserved faithfully the text of an earlier manuscript
with those same characteristics. We can conclude further that P does
not represent a direct revision of W (or W a revision of P), that it is
independent of W and W's tradition, and was the published, « authorized »
edition.
Our conclusion remains somewhat uncertain concerning P. We will
see later that B, the Oxford manuscript composed in the abbey of Saint
Victor and written down before mid-century, confirms for the most part
the P version, in the excerpts that it preserves. There is no doubt that a
student added the accessus, and perhaps the secundum alios parts.
However, if we accept that B confirms that P was the published version
available to other schools and excepted by Saint Victor to represent
another school's opinions on Juvenal, then we can argue that P, whether
or not it is a student edition, represents the authorized edition. With
the dating of B much earlier than P, it would seem that P's version was
in its present form at that time or earlier, that is, in William's lifetime.
The reference to William in the present tense in P suggests the P version
took its form before 1147. P, therefore, results from an edition prepared
possibly by William or with his knowledge, and was preserved relatively
faithfully.
Evidence derived from a study of the sources used in W and P will
help us to determine the exact relationship of the two versions. W shows
very limited use of sources: Isidore, Vergil, the In Boetium and
Philosophia of William of Conches, a possible Ciceronian reference, Ovid's
Ars amatoria, and Statius. Of these, all but the last two are cited in P.
 AND THEIR TEXTUAL RELATIONSHIP 37

P, however, uses a great range of sources: Macrobius' Saturnalia, Plato's

Timaeus, Maximianus' Elegiae, Augustine's De civitate Dei and De doctrina
christiana, Horace, Cicero, William's glosses on Plato, Priscian, Diascorides,
Boethius, Sallust, Suetonius, Servius, Lucan, Cornutus, and Jerome. From
these sources we can conclude that William had, between the period
of W, and of P, become familiar with Plato and Priscian - two of his later
glosses and with various classical and scientific sources. We know W
is a reportatio, and P the published version; but we can also conclude
that a period of time — perhaps as much as ten years - elapsed between
the two versions, and that P represents a later version for another lecture
series, a more mature presentation by William. Thus two separate sets
of lectures by William are represented in these two versions, with
revision by William most likely incorporated . P is not, however, a revision
of W; for W is a student's notes; P is a later version of the lectures
William gave .
These conclusions are probabilities based upon examination of the
material of the glosses. We can only present the conclusions as an hypo-
thesis which answers most of the problematic questions raised by the
two similar yet distinct texts of this commentary. We asked why they
are different and how they so became; we presented the major possibilities
and then relied upon the texts themselves and the other works of William
to supply a basis for selection. In the process we have tried to keep in
mind one major concern: What is the character of the dynamic of the
classical commentary tradition? We have seen two manuscripts in that
tradition, saw how they became different; we will now, to conclude this
chapter, briefly examine their relation to a cognate gloss - Oxford
Bodleian Auct. F. 6.9 (B). We will also attempt to show their indebtedness
to the ancient scholia and the two main commentary traditions of the
earlier middle ages.

Early Juvenal Glosses and the Oxford Text

In Catalogus translationum et commentariorum 18, volume one, Eva

M. Sanford grouped pre-thirteenth-century Juvenal commentaries into five
major clusters: the ancient scholia, the lost Heiric-Remigius glosses, the
<< Abrupto » commentary, the « Cornutus » commentary, and various
twelfth-century commentaries -- William of Conches, and its cognate gloss
Oxford (B), two manuscripts of a commentary in Berne, a Dresden
manuscript, and several others. We will proceed chronologically in our
examination because we are concerned with questions of influence.
William of Conches very seldom quoted the ancient scholia verbatim,
and in general he relied upon them only for historical identities and
information relating to Roman dress and customs. The most extended
borrowing is preserved in the accessus of P, taken from the ancient life
of Juvenal. We find Paridem panthomimum, the lines composed early

18. Eva M. Sanford , « Juvenal », in Catalogus translationum et commentariorum, ed.

by Paul O. Kristeller, vol. 1 (Washington, D. C. , Catholic University Press, 1960) , 1 , 175-238,
38 THE MANUSCRIPTS

in his career later incorporated into Satire 7 ( 11. 90-91 ), the suspicion of
the emperor, and Juvenal's death in exile in Egypt. P does not cite the
ancient vita directly and is quite independent of the scholia on the crucial
identification of the emperor as Domitian 19.
Other identities, however, are surely drawn from the scholia ; some
examples:

Sat. 1.33 the « magni delator amici » was Eliodorus (cf. P)

1.34 « Latinus » was the lover of Messalina, Nero's wife (cf. P)
1.51 << Venusina lucerna » - satire sheds light on crimes, and
Venusina was Horace's home town (cf. W, P)
1.60 << dum pervolat >» the puer was Nero (cf. W, P)
1.62 lacernate describes a woman in masculine dress (cf. W, P)

William's glosae draw on the scholia for information on customs- see

prebere palmas, Lupercus, - and clothing and ornaments. For the most
part, though, we find no direct relationship between them.
William's glosses also show a certain dependence on Carolingian
glosses identified by Wessner as redactions of the ancient Probus com-
mentary (he names them , x).
Sat. 1.20 << magnus alumnus » was Lucilius (cf. P)
1.43 sic palleat « exsanguis nimia coitus » (cf. P, W)
2.99 speculum pathici « adeo ut pane humecto faciem liniret ad
provocandum candorem speculumque Galbae » (cf. W, P)
2.142 palmas praebere « quia a manibus vapulabant, ut conci-
perent statim » (cf. W, P)

To conclude, William's glosses have a limited dependence on the scholia

and Carolingian glosses, but that dependence is significant because it is
the source of his historical interpretation of the Satires. We observe,
finally, that the glosses in P are no more dependent upon these sources
than W, either in the fuller parts, or in that part which is composed of
very brief glosses (to Satire 3. 150-6. 100).
The < Abrupto » and « Cornutus » commentaries are quite different
in character from the more ancient scholia, for they are fuller, and while
they preserve much of the historical and cultural material, they reveal a
greater concern with explication of the sense of the satires . Perhaps the
passage of time explains the greater need to explain such historically par-
ticular poems as satires are; the change is also characteristic of all
medieval classical commentaries. The change reflects a greater interest
in teaching and manipulating the texts. Virgil's Aeneid in particular
became, with Fulgentius and for the earlier Middle Ages, a repository of
classical knowledge and wisdom; all classical texts to some degree bore
the burden of this medieval expectation. One result was medieval clas-
sical literary criticism .

19. Paul Wessner, Scholia vetustiora in Juvenalem (Leipzig, Teubner, 1896).

 AND OTHER JUVENAL GLOSSES 39

Again, as with the ancient glosses, the « Abrupto » and « Cornutus >»
commentaries show no close affinities with William's glosses: P does,
however, directly cite « Cornutus » in two glosses on Sat. 3. 193 and 203
(see p. 176 our text). More important for William is their character and
their concern with explication de texte, for it is to these characteristics
that William's work shows similarities. We can compare some passages
from the three to show these similarities in more detail (considerable
damage exists in the two British Museum manuscripts).

London, British Museum Add. 30861 (Cornutus)

cum tener uxorem cum inquit animalia contra naturam fiant non
possum aliter nisi scribere satyram. Spadones uxores ducunt.
Mulieres officia venatoris sumunt cum occupari lane ficus detu-
<l> isti. Potest distingui ita: vulcani vento folles et † physi-
<cam > † contangit. Quomodo venti creantur motu aquae et
† reti ... † motus, faciant secundum physicas. Vulcani potest
distingui et antris Vulcani et venti Vulcani, id est folles † ... † quid
agant venti secundum philosophos intellige

London, British Museum Royal 15 B XVII (Abrupto)

Note sunt vie que aut Vulcano et Iasone dicte sunt; Ethna est
ti.ot ex noveni insulis quibus <Atlus > t ... t imperavit qui ex
fumo t ... terre Ethnis solus erat predicare qui venti flarent
unde eis non imperasse. Notissima est in quid mihi phisica et
unde ignis en ... is † est tractu terre sulphuree et ex incendio
modi t ... † qui ingredior ad mare per quasdam cavernas
W text
Antrum Vulcani id est Ethna que dicitur antrum Vulcani a conca-
vitate Vulvani † ... † in quas umbras dicit est enim Ethna aut regio-
nem Eoliani; † ... † sed quia phisicam faciebat unde perpetuus ignis
ibi erat, et in hoc notat se physicum. Physica vero talis est : Mons
iste cavernosus et huius habens intus sulphureos lapides parte ... qui
mixtus sulphureis lapidibus perpetuum facit incendium.

While we find no direct quotation, except the phrase « non possum aliter
nisi scribere satyram », and certainly William drew on other sources for
his scientific explanation, we find a strong similarity among approaches
here in the basic assertion that this passage concerns physica, secundum
philosophos rather than according to myth, and in that the glosses (Royal
and W) explain this in terms of sulphureus matter, fire, winds, and
caverns, that is, the elements of a volcano.
BM Add. 30861 (Cornutus)
O proceres censore Exclamatio est poete indignantis pro tincto
scelere et dicentes num quid opus est nobis censore, id est qui
videlicet iudicavit de tanto scelere, an aruspice, id est divinator
... Et quid significet hoc monstrum ? Nam sic ipse dicit N aut
monstrum, aut monstrum si ovis parerit vitulum et vacca agnum
40 THE MANUSCRIPTS

W text
censore cum aliud contingebat contra naturam confugiebant rationi
ad aruspices, ut scirent quid hoc signaret. Si non erat contra
naturam, ad censores ut illud iudicarent et corrigerent. Est igitur
summa cum talia fiant; est nobis aruspice opus an censore
cum † ... †

We can see considerable similarity in these glosses; it is not necessary to

claim one actually caused the other, but their similarity suggests a
common source, a common intent to write a certain kind of gloss for
this line.

One last comparison will suffice for our purposes.

BM Royal 15 B XVIII ( Abrupto)

Nuper in hanc urbem Albis pedibus venit vel quod venit pedibus de
pulvere terre Crispino. Pedes habuit albos vel albis ideo quia
servus erat, nam servis non erat licitum ferre calceos tinctos
t ... † potest non generaliter hoc de quolibet ignobili accipi, potest
dicit albis pedibus vel quia pedes erant nudi vel induti licinus ex
stupa facta.

W text
albis habenti sacrum honorem qui nuper pedibus in hanc urben;
albis pedibus pulvere et nuditate. In hoc qui dicit nuper notat
animi advenam, in hoc qui dicit pedibus albis ignobilem et pau-
perem, dum subiungit quare ...
P text

t ... quia serve utebantur sotularibus albis ad discretionem

nobilium

The << Abrupto » and « Cornutus » commentaries, then, resemble

William of Conches' glosses in their characteristic fulness, their interest
in the sense of the text and its explication, and in some critical obser-
vations. While these traditional glosae show only occasional direct
connection with those of William, they certainly affected William's work
in their characteristics and their purposes, which were quite different
from the ancient scholia (though they retained most of the historical and
cultural information in the scholia).
To this point our examination of the tradition has described limited
but significant influences of the earlier glosses on William and also
analyzed a distinct change in the character of Juvenal glosses. With our
final investigation, however, we will observe first hand a sure causal
relationship, not merely in the limited sense of the earlier glosses, but in
the surer sense of direct borrowing of matter.
R. W. Hunt identified the Juvenal gloss of Oxford, Bodleian Auct.
F. 6.9 (B) as the product of the abbey of Saint Victor in Paris, and it
 AND OTHER JUVENAL GLOSSES 41

appears to be mid-twelfth century from the angularity of the script,

clubbing, frequent use of uncial d, and of upright s in the middle and ends
of words. We note, however, use of the ampersand, the ẽ for est, and ae.
With these earlier forms we must date it rather early, and B is probably
the oldest of the three manuscripts 20. B then, must either be indebted
to an ancestor of P or possibly the reverse occurred . It appears that B,
however, is the indebted text because of its tendency to excerpt, the fact
that P in the scientific glosses is indebted to the De philosophia and B
clearly excerpts P, and the fullness of P's glosses, which probably are not
expansions of the briefer B.
B by nature is a collection of excerpts, among which William's opi-
nions, though not cited by name, take an important place. The accessus
of B reveals the extent of its indebtedness to P. B's formula of questions
to ask in an accessus is, except for one question, identical to P. The
vita shows similarities, and in its explanation of the title B repeats P's
error in naming Juvenal Decius. In its discussion of the etymologies and
meaning of satira B gives P's three etymologies -— satyri, lanx satura, and
agrestis, and uses similar wording:

B text

Satira [from satiri ] est nuda quemadmodum sunt nudi, quia nude
et aperte et clare id est ab agribus et circuicionibus, et sine
integumento Romanorum vicia reprehendit. Vel a satis, id est
articis, quia satir Grece, agrestis Latine, dicitur. Rustici t ... t
quotidian post collectas messas faciebant festivitates Cereri et Baco,
et vocabat arvambalia [ P, item; Macrobius, Saturnalia: ambarvalia]
quia ambiendo arva fiebant in illis vero diebus rustici uniuscuiusque
ville ponebant mensas sub aere, et epulabantur illi vere inebriati
surgebant et convicia alteri in alteros ferebant; inde venit in usum
quod reprehensio quelibet satira diceret, a satis, id est agrestibus .

B gets this etymology, unusual and not one of the classical definitions,
most probably from P. We will cite definite evidence of B's indebtedness
to P here; in the appendix are more passages from B, including its
accessus, and they can be compared with our text of W and P.

Telephus vel Telephus, id est fabula de eo facta, qui ab Achille

vulneratus est de quo dictum est non posse sanari nisi ab eadem
hasta tam tangeretur ab qua vulneratus est; et fuit rex
(P) Telephus nomen est fabule. Telephus rex fuit Nusorum de quo
legitur: quod vulneratus ab Achille, accepit responsum se non posse
sanari nisi ab eodem et hasta eadem et eodem loco vulnus acciperet ;
Nota magis merito volo scribere enim sapiens sum, quia alicui sua
domus nec secreta nec domus ... Marti dedicavit numus tumulos

20. [Richard W. Hunt] , « A Fragment of a Manuscript from Saint Victor », Bodleian

Library Record 4 (1952), 124-126.
42 THE MANUSCRIPTS

† ho ... † multum ab urbe remotum ubi philosophi et poete studere et

scribere soliti erant. Per hoc innuit se logicum esse (P ... per hoc
quod dicit innuit se esse de numero illorum [P, p. 97 ]).

Antrum Vulcani an vocat Etham que est ista eloliam, et per hoc notat
phisicam, quia in Ethnas cavernosa terra et surfurea est. Venti vero
collidentes ibi emittunt ignem quia sulphur est calide nature et in
aere ex collisione ventorum nascuntur fulgura in gravedines. (P:
quod in Etholia est ignis perpetuus, et ita se commendat in physica.
Unde ergo ille ignis perpetuus contingat videamus: hoc non est
aliud nisi quod terra illa cavernosa est, et habet lapides sulfureos ...
[P, p . 98 ]).

Eacus hic notat immortalitatem quasi diceret poeta et phisicus

sum quia ... (P: dicens se fabulas nosse commendat se in poetica. )
Columne vel aliter marmora Fronto ruspa illius magistri scilicet
discipuli durissimi ingenii ... et columne, id est subtiliores legendo ...
(P Frontoni, p. 101 ).

ferula est quedam arbos unde magistri in sinistro manu suos disci-
pulos percuciebant. Dicunt phisici quod duricia ingenii est ex
sanguine circa cor congelato; ferula vero est calide nature; cum
aliquis in sinistra manu inde percutitur sunt ibi quedam vene
contingentes usque ad cor deferunt calorem illum et calefaciunt
sanguinem et sic excitatur ingenium. (P, et nos ergo ... Magistri
ergo considerantes tarditatem ingenii ex sanguine circa cor congelato
procedere pueros in sinistra manu, que magis propinque est cordi,
cum instrumento de huis modi arbore facto percutiebant ... [P,
p. 102 ]).
alumnus id est Lucilius qui satiram scripsit ( P, p. 102 ) .
et Gillo deuncem -B gives a table of fractions of twelve (P, p. 105).

Marius Marius Romanus imperator fuit ... et iste Marius, id est Nero,
bibit ab actava (P, p. 108).

Satire 2 O proceres mos erat Romanorum quando aliquid contra

naturam implorare auruspices; ideo dicit O proceres cum ista fiant
contra naturam, scilicet quod vir nubit viro. Est opus aruspice an
censore. Censores erant morum corruptores ac si diceret aruspice
est opus. Dicens ... in hoc facto an opus est iudice qui eso dampnet
an aruspice qui consideret (P, p. 157) .
Fuscinam fuscina est quod deferebat curres in gladiaturam. Quidam
es progenie Graeci amasius erat Neronis. Formam cuius Nero
cupiens videre fecit eum diffibulare et currere ad gladiaturam (P,
p. 162).

The similarity of these and many other B glosses to P in particular is

striking and is sure evidence of B's indebtedness to the tradition of P.
E. M. Sanford, however, indicates that B is indebted as fully to the
 AND OTHER JUVENAL GLOSSES 43

« Abrupto » commentary as it is to William's and perhaps others 21. From

the rather early date of B, we must conclude that B is excerpted from
an ancestor of P, perhaps twenty-five to thirty years before P.
One example will suffice to demonstrate the unique character of
some of B's glosses, and the individuality of some of P's comments.
In the glosses on quando uberior B presents a distinctly moral economy
and an understanding of the causation of sin:

B Votum, id est cupiditas, pro qua multi occiduntur, et multa alia

alia mala hinc procedunt .
W Scilicet votum de futuro bono
P Votum est desiderium animi voce manifestum; desiderium quando
non manifestatur voce notat vero si modum teneat non est materia
Iuvenalis; sin ac eius materia est.
B Timor a timendo
W Timor de futuro malo
P Timor de futuro malo et est timor, timere, timenda, et non
timenda quod vicium, est, et sic materia est
B Sua ira unde multociens oritur sedicio
W Ira de praesenti malo
P Ira est calor accidentale procedens ex colera diffusa a felle
mordente ipsum cor, et est de presenti malo. Quedam vero ira est
virtus qua contra vicia irascimur, ad quam inmutabat qui dicebat
...

B Voluptas unde progrediunt ebrietates et commisationes que iterum

mala sunt.
W Voluptas de presenti bono
P Voluptas delectatio est carnis . Hanc accipe omnium sensuum
universalem delectationem sed non omnes sensuum voluptates
illicite sunt, quia Conditor ut omnis sensus oblentamentum suum
haberet et ideo tam diverse qualitates rebus date sunt [ gives the
five senses and their pleasures] .

B Gaudia procedit superbia et vanitas

W Gaudia corporis
P Gaudium est delectatio animi de presenti bono, quod si modum
excedat materia Iuvenalis.

To conclude, then, B concentrates on the sins and their causation; W

is brief and actually unconcerned with moral issues but uses good and
bad in a commonplace secular sense; P is dually focussed on defining
Iuvenal's matter and on the physiological explanations of these passions,
while distinguishing the bad passions as William's materia. W apparently
confused the glosses for voluptas and gaudia, and this mistake can either

21. Sanford, p. 192.

44 EXCERPTS FROM BODLEIAN F. 6.9

be attributed to a scribe's confusion or to the rough student reportatio

character of W.
In this chapter we proposed and tested a number of hypotheses to
explain the relationship of W and P, and settled on a solution which
accounts for the facts available and provides a satisfactory explanation in
keeping with the general character of those two manuscripts and their
texts. Briefly, W represents a copy of a student reportatio which was
abbreviated to some extent by both W scribes. P is the published version,
probably an edition of William's text by one of his students. P preserves
the more formal version. B, not by William but including excerpts of
much of the material of the P tradition, was a composite produced at the
abbey of Saint Victor, and attests to the diffusion of the P version.
We have observed in a circumscribed investigation the dynamics of the
Juvenal commentary tradition, and thus have presented a limited
explanation of how these three texts became their unique, individual, and
yet materially related, selves.

Accessus and Excerpts from Oxford Bodleian Auct F 6.9

Commentarium in Juvenalem

Ante adiacentis littere istius operis expositionem quedam inquisitione

digna videntur, quibus expositis post intelligentiam memorie infixis, totius
libri series ad intelligendum erit facilior, et sententia ad retinendum elu-
cidior. Que sint illa igitur videamus pro primis : Quis sit auctor, et unde
sit, postea que sit materia operis; que auctoris intencio; et que earundem
utilitas. Ad ultimum: Quis sit titulus; cui parti philosophie supponatur.
Et quo genere carminis utatur, et quare hoc potius cum ipse sapiens vel
hoc vel aliud potuisset describere. Hec omnia singulatim ex ordine
exponemus. Auctor operis est Iuvenalis, et ab Aquino opido dicitur
Aquinates, qui in prima etate tacuit; in secunda vero tempore Claudii
Neronis imperatoris satiricus effectus est. Et primum contra Paridem
pantomimum ipsius imperatoris exclamando hos versus edidit:
Quid non dant proceres dabit histrio (Iuv. 7. 91 ) et reliqua. Qua-
propter ipse Iuvenalis cum imperator non auderet eum publice dagnare
expulsus Roma; unius cohortis cum octogenario in extremas partes
Egipti princeps constituitur. Qui dum ibi dimisso cum excercitu ab
octogenario consuetis spectaculis et ludis que Rome fiebant carere
t ... algore et periit.
Materia est pene et vicia tam Romana quam alia. Intencio est ea
reprehendere. Utilitas est vero coegit eis de viciis et auditis et intelligencie
uictis eorum reprehensionibus. semper illi approprietatibus obssistere
consuescamus. Sed sequitur de titulo. Titulus est talis : Deci Iunii
Iuvenalis satirarum primus liber incipit. Decius dictus est quia decimus
patris sui filius fuit. Iunius dictus est quia Iunio mense natus est et
erat mos Romanorum quod secundum tempora in quibus filii nascebantur
inponebant eis nomina. Et queritur quare inponant tot nomina? Dictum
quod ad commendationem fit poete et operis quia sicut vilis persona nec
 EXCERPTS FROM BODLEIAN F. 6.9 45

etiam uno nomine vult denotari, e contrario persona clara et illustris

multis vult denotari nominibus.
Cui parti philosophie supponatur? Satis patet, cum de moribus
loquatur etiche videlicet. Utitur satirico genere carminis, id est
reprehensorio scribendo satyram. Ad quod nec voluntas nec delectacio
inpulit sed poetarum maxime inutilia † ... † scribentium intolerat ... †
indignatio. Et quia haec inpellunt scribere saturam videndum est quid
sit satira, et unde dicatur. Satira est nemini parcens viciorum nuda
reprehensio. Tribus modis potest dici satira. Satira potest dici a quadam
lance que erat in templo veste, ubi ponebantur relliquie sacrificiorum.
Et erat vas illud latum de super acutum uno; et ita erat futile, ut relliquie
in eo posite statim funderentur. Haec ut refecta diversis generibus
ferculorum acceptabilis diis estimabant, eo quod multis sacietatem
prebebat. Ita poete tractatum diversis generibus viciorum refectum diis
Graecum existimabant; et dicebatur satira quasi satura. Potest enim
satira dici a satiris agrestibus diis nemorum qui dicuntur Hudi, dicaces,
capri pedes, derisores, saltatores. Similitudinaria ratione satira est nuda
quemadmodum nudi sunt, qui nude et aperte et clare id est sicut ab agribus
et circuitionibus. Et sinon (?) integumento Romanorum vicia reprehendit.
Dicaces sunt, scilicet dicax etiam satira est. Nulli nec pro minis nec
probandiciis dicendo partes . Capri pedes sunt, scilicet quia caper est
fetidum animal et ipsa fetida quia fetida vitia reprehendendo ex
in † ... † verbis est conposita. Derisores sunt, scilicet ipsa quoque derisoria
est quia proprium est satire deridendo omnia vicia reddarguere. Salta-
tores sunt, scilicet etiam saltatrix est quia salvando nulum <sic>
continue de vicio ad vicium tractat, quia quemadmodum de loco ad locum
saltando incedunt non gradatim passibus , peduum, sic ipsa non continuando
littera a littera nec sententia a sentencia describitur. P ... t ... † a leves
sunt, scilicet et ipsa levis est quia leviter de vulgaribus et cotidianis viciis
Romanos redarguit.Vel a saturis id est a rusticis, quia satir Grece a agrestis
Latine dicitur. Rustici enim quotidian post collectas messes faciebant
festivitates Cereri et Baco, et vocabant arvambalia, quia ambiendo arva
fiebant in illis vero diebus rustici uniuscuiusque ville ponebant mensas
sub aere, et epulabantur, illi vero inebriati surgebant et convicia alteri
in alteros ferebant, inde venit in usum quod reprehensio quelibet satira
diceretur a saturis, id est agrestibus .

(Satira I ) Hec prima satira, vel satira vel proemium potest dici, vel qua
proemium quia proprietatem satire vel proemium retinet. Facit
quas ... proemium sequentis operis, nam dicit quid velit scribere ?
et subiungit c<au>sas quare velit, in quibus causis poet<ae > de diversis
viciis tangit. Demum ostendit quod satiram velit scribere et subdit causas
quare magis velit sat<i >ram, et in istis causis omnes communiter
reprehendit. Et sic in reprehensione potest dici satire in ostensione
proemium. Et sciendum est quod nulli parcet, cum sui ordinis sueque
professionis omnes reprehendat. Quod ceteri videntes aliquam veniam
minime sibi sperare valeant. In hac prima vere reprehendit poetas hoc
ordine: Primum de inutilibus scriptis, deinde de iactancia ubi dicit se
46 EXCERPTS FROM BODLEIAN F. 6.9

sapientes fore. Post ea de multitudine <reprehendit > omnes communiter.

Quia nec voluntas nec delaectacio <sic >, sed intolerantia et indignatio
impulit ad crebendum < sic >, ponit quaestionem in qua membrum
alterum subintelligitur cum in omni sint duo. Ita exclamando ex auruto
< sic> cum indignatione Semper ego auditor etcetera quasi diceret ego
semper auditor tantum, reponam umquam an numquam reponam ?
Vexatus tociens qui fatigatus sum multociens audiendo Teseidem Codri.
Vel aliter scilicet semper ego etc, unquam ne id est nonne unquam
reponam ? Teseis est fabula facta de Teseo. Teseus fuit quidam gigas qui
propter Proserpinam rapiendam cum Piritoo ad inferos descendit. impune
etc Telephus tragedus quidam fuit qui grandes tragedias fecit; vel Telephus
id est fabula de eo facta, qui ab Achille vulneratus est de quo dictum
est non posse sanari ni si ab eadem hasta tam tangeretur ab qua vulneratus
est. Et fuit rex. Scriptus et in tergo pili parte non adhuc. Mos erat anti-
quorum scribere tantum in parte carnis, sed utraque pagina folii et margo
tot et tanta aponendo deficiebat. Nota magis merito volo scribere enim
sapiens sum. Quia alicui sua domus nec secreta nec domus sit magis nota.
Lucus martis. Lucus martis id est ariopagus; hec villa martis quia cum
pallas condidisset Athenas in tres partes divisit. Arces sibi retinuit,
navalia Phebo consecravit, Marti dedicavit nemus tumulos † ha ... † multum
ab urbe remotum, ubi philosophi et poete studere et scribere soliti erant.
Per hoc innuit se logicum esse. Antrum vulcani an vocat Ethna que est
ista Eloliam et per hoc notat phisicam, quia in Ethna scilicet cavernosa
terra et surfurea est. Venti vero collidentes ibi mittunt ignem, quia sulphur
est calide nature et in aere ex collisione ventorum nascuntur fulgura in
gravedines. Vel aliter: lucus Martis ubi Mars concubuit cum Ilia, vel de
ariopago, quia Ares Mars pagos villa dicitur vel de colco ubi erat serpens
per vigil. Et ista actenas Platonis studium ariopagum dictum est, mortuo
vero Platone scole eius in tres partes scisse sunt : alii stoyci, alii epicuri,
alii peripatetici ... † Ares vero virtus pagos villa inde ariopagus villa
virtutis ... quid agant venti notum est mihi que expositum est
q.t.v.Eacus hic notat inmortalitatem quasi diceret poeta et phisicus sum,
quia <s >cio quas penas habet apud inferos. ferula est quedam arbos
<sic> unde magistri in sinistra manu suos discipulos percuciebant,
dicunt enim phisici quod duricia ingenii est ex sanguine circa cor congelato.
Ferula vero est calide nature, cum aliquis in sinistra manu inde percutitur
sunt ibi quedam vene contingentes usque ad cor deferunt calorem illum
et calefaciunt sanguinem, et sic excitatur ingenium.
cur tamen si aliqui interrogant. Campa, id est materia. Bene convenit
similitudo, quia sicut qui currit in stadio curtam metam incipiendi et
finiendi habet. Sic et poete scripserunt. Alumnus, id est Lucilius, qui
satiram scripsit. Magnus quia magnum quid fecit; si vacat sciebat illos
impeditos esse, et placidi ut poete: s <c >iebatque ad hoc viciosos admi-
tentis < sic >, id est accipiatis . Cum unus patricios provocet patricios
vocant senatores qui patricii dicuntur, vel etate vel similitudine cure est.
Crispinus erat egiptius; egiptii incognita nobis genera libidinis excercent.
Hinc habebat Nero inter amicos, ut docerent eum nova genera libidinis.
Piscator etiam solitus ne ... dere † pisciculos vilissimas qui Romam
 EXCERPTS FROM BODLEIAN F. 6.9 47

veniens cum albis calcibus cum esset viciosisimus factus est alicuius
Neronis. Sed cum a Nerone senator factus est tante superbie fuit,
abundans opibus ut alios anulos estate alios hyeme ferret, ut nobilis
Pomani adeoque sediciosum fingebat ut anuli pondus ferre non posset.
Ac ita velebat digitum con anulo quod iudicium erat magne luxurie.
Lacuius <sic > unus ex p <l >ebe qui habitabant iusta Nilum. Extra
pocula Caper fuit avarus et austerus scundem quosdam, vel optimus
scultor ciphorum qui pingebatur incisis abstremius, vel caper poeta
abstemius fuit. Abstemius vero proprie dicitur abstinens a vino hinc ideo
Romani sobrietati studentes. In ciphis suis melioribus celari faciebant
ut ad pocula accedentes sobrietatis memores essent. Vel aliter caper est
animal vineas corrodens qui Baco inmolatur illud iterum animal Romani
extra pocula habebant, quod significat quia vineas rodit.

(Satira II ) Ultra Sauromatas hucusque quasi prologum fecit in qua

dixit se velle scribere et quid vellet scribere et quare hoc potius nunc aut
incipit librum suum. In cuius exordio reprehendit illos qui sub speciem
religionis male viventes alios corrigunt, quanvis aliis sint peiores. Sic
dices se Malle fugere ultra Sauromatas ubi nulla est hominum habitacio
pre nimio frigore quam istos de moribus predicare audire. In hac prima
scilicet redarguit viciosos doctores , et iudices pluri qui cum alios bona
doctrina et exemplo bone conversationis illuminare deberent et ad morum
honestatem provacare nesciunt. Quid debeant adnunciare ? Speciem
sapientie aliumde sibi adquirentes et preterea si quando bonum adnuntient
eorum mala vita totum offuscat. Unde fit ut incontemptu veniant, et
notat de naturalibus viciis ab quorum iniquitatis intolerantia sic incipit.
Ultra scilicet aetra, tociens isti tales audent dicere de moribus qui fingunt
se bonos doctores, curios, id est bonos doctores.
1
 CHAPTER II

THE NATURE AND FUNCTION OF WILLIAM OF CONCHES'

GLOSAE IN IUVENALIS SATIRAS

William of Conches composed the Glosae in Iuvenalis Satiras in

the second quarter of the twelfth century, sometime in the twenty
years or more of his teaching career at Paris and Chartres. It was a
quarter-century of great intellectual activity. We are relatively certain
that he had completed by that time his Boethius glosses, the De philoso-
phia mundi and, if we accept Jeauneau's chronology, the Macrobius and
possibly the Priscian glosses 22. We know little about William or his
teaching career, what little we do know can be found mainly in John of
Salisbury's Metalogicon and William's Dragmaticon, but his works - as
we now know them- - sufficiently demonstrate his intellectual and inqui-
sitive nature, which is, for our purposes, what is most important. From
documents and his writings, then, we will sketch in the historical teacher
and philosopher, the particular writer of the object of our inquiry.
William certainly thought at the time of the writing of the Glosae in
Iuvenalem that poetry was intimately related to the sciences and the
trivium arts. Classical poetry was for him, of course, an educational
tool; it also, fortunately, preserved in a whole complete and polished the
remnants of the « golden age » and elusive references to the knowledge
of that age. The classical poets, as he says at one point, tried to be
philosophers, rhetoricians, and scientists as well as poets (see text,
p. 97). These glosses capture for us the philosopher's intimate involve-
ment with his classical heritage - with a poetry sophisticated morally
and rhetorically - and his masterly concern with teaching it. The
glosses, in the two states in which we now have them, represent students'
reportage of William's teaching, a part we have isolated and analyzed, as
well as first-hand evidence of William's composition. We thus must
confront these glosses historically as testaments both of William's
intellectual activity in the 1130's and of his methods and concerns in
teaching the lectio poetae.

22. Jeauneau, ed. , Glosae, p. 14.

50 THE NATURE AND FUNCTION

We cannot claim for such simple glosses what Macrobius or various

other philosophic commentators did in their commentaries, so it is
important that we describe exactly what these glosae do. We may find
it necessary at some point to contrast the glosses with other commen-
taries to show their differences, but preferably this essay will describe
analytically what these glosses themselves are : What William assumes
with his terms, what are his methods, and what effect he achieves by
them. Similarly, the purpose of this essay is not to contrast William's
glosses with modern criticism. In fact, we want to inquire after a certain
historically particular writer, a teacher William of Conches, who chose to
make a gloss for the first book of Juvenal's Saturae in the second quarter
of the twelfth century and made many other choices consequent to that
first one, choices which resulted in the selection and ordering of material
for a specific purpose. We will try to unravel those choices to com-
prehend his reading of Juvenal.
This essay is an inquiry into the nature and function of the Glosae.
The historical cause of teacher, school, and student provides a compre-
hensive explanation of the nature of the Glosae. (Such is the case in
part because they preserve a certain teacher's lectio of Juvenal, even, in
one case, in student lecture notes. ) Characteristics of the Saturae as
William understood them, and of satire as a genre, explain, in part, the
nature of the glosae. The critical attitudes and assumptions held by the
school and the students, but mainly those of the teacher, specifically
comprise another cause. The glosses, finally, reflect the teacher's prae-
lectio and his response to student's needs and abilities. These causes,
along with the tradition of Juvenal glosses which influenced him, explain
why William composed the glosses, what was sufficient to move him to
make them, and they are bases for William's selection of his material.
Our second inquiry, which investigates the effect of the combination
of the Satires and the glosses, will give an account of the function of these
glosses. We will ask whether the combination changes the Satires'
effect, or modifies it. Though the combination's effect is, in essence,
William's critical intention, we as modern critics are limited to describing
the actual effect and by deduction reaching his critical principles and his
principles of selection. These principles of selection of material, prin-
ciples which guide the work to accomplish the specific effect in combin-
ation with the text, should show similarities to the « causes » of our
first explanation .
Our final inquiry will apply these static analytical descriptions of
principles, causes, and effects to a close study of the glosses as they
interact with the satires. We will, then, observe closely William's method
of glossing. At this point we will try to point out the effect of the lecture
and the times on the Glosae in Iuvenalem. We will then, hopefully, have
stated what are the nature and function of the Glosae.
The chapter is an argument in three parts. The first part - our first
inquiry - presents the terms, critical concepts, and assumptions of
William of Conches as the basic tools for the argument. It attempts to
demonstrate a systematic poetic in William's approach to Juvenal, and to
 OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM 51

show a principle of order and selection inherent to the commentary which

made the Glosae a coherent approach. The second inquiry builds on the
terms, concepts, and assumptions presented in the first, and presents the
main problem addressed: what is the effect of the combination of the
glosses and the satires- that is, how do the glosses alter, add to, or
complicate the satires ? This question assumes a more profound question:
what is the effect of the combination of William of Conches' poetic
theories, his intellectual conceptualization of the satires and of poetry,
with the satires ? Here we realize that the glosses, in their intimate
involvement with the satires, diffuse the critical theories - the poetic-
throughout the lectio poetae and result in shifting the effect of the satires
of Juvenal from that of an attack on historical particulars to more diverse
moral, philosophical, and scientific objects. The third inquiry is a careful
proof of this theory.

First Inquiry

We want to know, of course, why William of Conches wrote his

glosses on Juvenal, but we cannot, ultimately, describe the private thoughts
and feelings which motivated their composition. We can, however, know
relatively surely what characteristics of Juvenal's Saturae caused William
to write the glosses, caused him to feel that they needed to be written,
and guided his choice of matter for the glosses .
For William, Juvenal's satires were, primarily, indirect attacks on
contemporaries and their deeds. This main characteristic, William's
primary assumption concerning them, is the basis on which William chose
to include much of the material we find in the glosses. To be sure, satire
is an historically particular genre which demands at least to some extent
the reader's familiarity with details of life, politics, customs, and
personalities contemporary to the satire. Satire's effect, it can be argued,
is blunted if the object of its attack is misunderstood by or even com-
pletely unknown to the reader. On the other hand, the careful reader
can always, to some degree, grasp the universal argument embedded in
the satire. Juvenal, in particular, is a satirist as much as any other
concerned with the moment, contemporaries, and customs. While Juvenal
may have for the most part broken with Lucilius and did not as a
practice name contemporaries in the satires, it is nonetheless clear that
he attacked individuals as well as customs.
William assumed, therefore, that Juvenal's indirect references were
an artful integument for his attack on certain historical particulars and
personalities. One of William's purposes in these glosses, then, is to
reveal the historical « causes >> of the satires, the personalities and
customs of the times.
The second major characteristic to concern us is that artistic indi-
rection of particular attack which is so characteristic of Juvenal's art.
Juvenal's compressed , rhetorical style is his hallmark and essential quality
but it is, consequently, eliptical and elusively fragmentary. William
52 THE NATURE AND FUNCTION

wanted to provide in his glosses the moral and philosophical probabilities

which explain the satires' compression, Juvenal's choice of objects of
attack, and the flow of the poems themselves. He sought, in effect, to
describe Juvenal's « moral art. >»
What are these « probabilities » ? We understand them to be the
probabilities of human choice of actions, the probability of certain kinds
of characters choosing certain actions and, of course, the values commonly
attached to kinds of action. The ordering of these « moral » choices and
their concomitant actions demands a process of selection by the author
which relies upon the general reader's moral assumptions. The author
can manipulate the reader and shape his reaction to the satire by his
series of choices. Partly, of course, these moral assumptions are imbedded
in the historical personages, their actions, and customs portrayed in the
satires. In a sense, then, William must provide for the reader the principle
of Juvenal's selection of image, reference, phrase, and scene in terms of
a philosophical world of moral cause and effect.
Another major characteristic of Juvenal's satires, for William, is
their explicit, concrete imagery. Juvenal portrayed the concrete physical
world with minute yet effectively selected detail, and frequently the cause-
effect relationship by which he organized this detail was physiological or
natural processes, the human appetites and desires. The two forces, the
natural and the human, are linked closely as William sees parallel and
interrelated the two parts of philosophy - physica and ethica - thus,
as a result, we have a naturalistic poetic as well as a moral one. William
provided in his glosses what Juvenal did not explicitly work out, or
incorporate, in his satires, to demonstrate another principle of selection
and ordering of the satires.
These characteristics of Juvenal's Satires, important for William,
provided the grounds for William's explicitly stated as well as implicit
critical assumptions. Though the accessus of P is the work of a student
of William, we can accept its poetic and critical adumbrations as the
heritage if not the actual teaching of William of Conches, since it was
composed in the 1140's at the latest, and cites him in the present tense.
In the accessus the composer of P proposes two major theories of poetry,
the first and perhaps most important specifically the teaching of William
of Conches. The text follows (see English translation, p. 28, of Chapter I ) :

Sunt qui querendum existiment et in hoc et in aliis auctoribus

cui parti philosophie subponantur. Magister vero Bernardus dicebat
hoc non esse in auctoribus querendum cum ipsi nec partes philoso-
phie nec de philosophia tractant. Magister Wilelmus de Conchis
dicit auctores omnes quamvis nec partes sint philosophie nec de
ipsa agant, philosophie suponi propter quam tractant, et omnes illi
parti philosophie suponi , propter quam tractant. Utraque ergo
lectio vera est: auctores suponuntur philosophie, id est propter
eticam que pars est philosophie tractant, ut scilicet moralem com-
parent instructionem. Et auctores non suponuntur philosophie, id
est non sunt partes eius (p. 89 our text).
 OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM 53

Earlier we read: << he works in this manner, therefore, reprehending

evils themselves, in respect to this purpose, that he might draw back the
listener from evils » (Agit ergo hoc modo reprehendenda ipsa vitia, hac
utilitate ut auditorem retrahat a viciis [p. 89 ] ) . For William, then, satire
is an ethical-philosophical art composed of two characteristics : « repre-
hending evils themselves » ( « hoc modo reprehendenda ipsa vitia » ), and
furnishing moral order ( « moralem comparent instructionem » ) « so that
he might draw back the listener from evils » ( « ut auditorem retrahat a
viciis » ). Satire is primarily attack, but for William that attack finds
its purpose in providing moral order and attempting to draw men from
evil.
For the most part, though, William's glosses are not pious exhortations
or what we think of as moral persuasion, but are an explication of a
moral poem in terms of philosophical matter. The writer of the
accessus and William contend auctores are part of « philosophy on
account of what <matter > they treat » (« philosophia propter quam
tractant »). They are specifically subsumed under ethica, but poets and
writers do not, consequently, practice a kind of casuistry. William, there-
fore, considers poetry and poets as dependent on and part of philosophia
itself. Gilson, we might conclude, points out that ethicus at this time
was used to denote a philosopher, in contrast to a sacred writer; ethica
took a similar, broad connotation 23.
Satire has the peculiar characteristic of using the object of its attack
as its materia. The most important matter of satire is, of course, men's
actions, and the choices which determine them, so satire is by nature
<< moral >» . But satire's materia, at least in William's opinion, embraces
as well physica, medica, historia, logica, values, and customs - in actuality,
many of the parts of philosophia. William explains these elements in
terms of << moral ordering » ( moralis instructio).
Bernard Silvester's Commentary on the First Six Books of the Aeneid
is perhaps the most extensive example of such an interpretation of poetic
material 24. Bernard believed that Virgil had interwoven into the fabric
of the Aeneid the riches of classical (actually medieval) knowledge struc-
tured around a scheme of the ages of man. Such an assumption allowed
Bernard to exhibit his philosophic knowledge but also allowed him to
present a schema of education - modified from Fulgentius' Virgiliana
continentia - in the broadest psychological as well as philosophical terms,
of infant to mature adult.
William's glosae show no such scheme, but they do reach through the
eliptical, allusive poetry of Juvenal's satires to break open their philoso-
phical truth. William, who assumed the satires were this rather broad

23. Etienne Gilson, History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages (New York,
Random House, 1955) , p . 623.
24. Bernard Silvester, Commentum super sex libros Eneidos Virgilii, ed. G. Riedel
(Greifswald, Julius Abel Verlag, 1924) . Daniel Meerson, « The Ground and Nature of
Literary Theory in Bernard Silvester's Twelfth-Century Commentary on the Aeneid » (Ph. D.
dissertation, University of Chicago, 1967) .
54 THE NATURE AND FUNCTION

kind of moral persuasion, glossed the style of persuasion of these satires

with the help of rhetorical tools of analysis. Rhetoric is, essentially, the
use of language to affect men's action, and thus in one sense is the art of
moral persuasion. Figures such as allegoria, translatio, and integumentum
are terms of William's moral poetics by which he explicates the ethical
argument of Juvenal.
William uses the term integumentum once, in W: << another cause
why he writes satire, certainly the gluttony of the emperor. But because
he did not dare to reprehend that one he indicates [ him] by integument,
thus ... » ( « alia causa quare scribit satiram, scilicet gulositas imperatoris.
Sed quia non est ausus reprehendere illum notat per integumentum sic ... »
[p. 108 ] ) . William clearly equates Marius, here the lemma glossed, with
Nero; to William the satire attacks an historical personage but at the
same time a vice termed gulositas. Juvenal's materia is historical, moral
because it concerns action and choice, and is the immediate and profound
causa of the satire as well as being the object of the satiric attack.
As we see here, William will attempt to isolate causae for the satires,
and by doing so formulate a moral ars of satire. Within the brief gloss
quoted above, William defines the causa scribendi, the materia poesis, itself
a causa, and the poetic technique of indirection of attack the ars of the
moral poetic. P formulates the same definition in more familiar rhetorical
terms and confirms our assumption that William uses integumentum as
a rhetorical figure: << But Nero undid this order by his gluttony and ate
from the eighth hour, and concerning this he reprehends him but not by
his own name, but corresponding enough he indicates him by circum-
locution, calling him Marius the exile » ( « Sed Nero gulositate sua hunc
ordinem pervertebat et ab octava hora comedebat, et de hoc eum repre-
hendit sed non proprio nomine, sed satis competentum circumlocutione
eum notat, vocans eum Marium exulem » [ p . 109 ] ) . William extends the
rhetorical , moral-historical interpretation through the satires, further
identifying Neronian figures such as Eliodorus, Paris, and Maecenas to
provide a consistent rationale for Juvenal's selection of objects of attack.
William assumes that the satires are moral persuasion in part because
he conceives of the causa compositionis as moral. The causa, described
by the P accessus, is as follows:

The cause of composition of this work in truth is such: Juvenal

was born in the town of Aquinas, he came to Rome in the time of
Nero, and seeing Paris the actor so familiar with the emperor that
he could do nothing ever except by his nod, out of indignation he
burst forth into these verses:
What the princes do not give so an actor gives, you
Cameninos,
You Bareas, do you care for the great halls of the
nobles ?
Finally, so that he might more sufficiently reprove them, he brought
himself to writing satire, not only to Nero and Paris, but his poured
out over others acting evilly.
 OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM 55

Causa vero compositionis huius operis talis est: Iuvenalis iste

natus de Aquinate opido, tempore Neronis Roman venit, vidensque
Paridem panthomimum ita familiarem imperatori ut nihil unquam
nisi eius nutu ageret, ex indignatione prorupit in hos versus :
Quod non dant proceres dabit histrio, tu Cameninos / Tu Bareas,
tu nobilium magna atria curas ? Tandem ut eos sufficientius
reprehenderet, ad satiram scribendam se transtulit, ne nec in
Neronem et Paridem tantum, sed in alios viciose agentes eius
redundavit (p . 89).

The cause of the satires' composition became their matter and the object
of the satiric attack.
William, curious to identify the contributing forces by which, in
combination, facit hos versus, gives the causae and poetic skills necessary
for effective attack. Most striking is the immediate cause of the first
satire : << reponam : that is, never will I give back a reply in reproving
those talkative ones. And note that he says too sharply reponam, for to
requite properly is of giving birth. He shows, therefore, through this
word he conceives that against those he is able to restrain nothing; thence
he adds [his ] just cause of requiting because often he has been harrassed
by their loquaciousness » ( « reponam, id est numquam vicem reddam in
reprehendenda garulos illos et nota quod nimis mordaciter dixit reponam ,
reponere enim proprie parturientium est. Ostendit igitur per hoc verbum
se concepisse quod contra istos nihil possit parcere, deinde subiungit
iustam causam reponendi quia sepe vexatus est illorum garulitate »
[p. 92 ]. William here asserts Juvenal's cause for replying is just ( iustam
causam reponendi ) and bases the assertion on the fact that the objects of
his attack are so bad and troubling that « he is able to restrain nothing »
(nihil possit parcere). He continues : « Et ego; therefore he says vexatus
well; after reponam he places vexatus. Hostlers are accustomed in foaling
to harrass mares so that the pores being opened from heat they might
give birth more easily. Through this, therefore, how he says vexatus he
shows himself to have been prepared to reproving. But that no one
would think that he had been troubled by a virtuous matter, he adds by
what he was harrassed , certainly the Theseid of Codrus. » Evils and those
who do them ( vitia and agentes ) are the direct cause of the birth of the
satire. But the last quotation relates the birth of more than just the
satire; the harassment prepares and gives birth to the persona Juvenal
of the satire. The text follows: « Et ego: ergo inquit vexatus bene,
post reponam ponit vexatus . Solent agasones equas in tempore partus
vexare ut apertis poris ex calore facilius pariant; per hoc igitur quomodo
dicit vexatus ostendit se paratum esse ad reprehendendum. Sed ne puta-
verit aliquis quod honesta re esset vexatus, subiungit quo sit vexatus,
scilicet Teseide Cordi » (p. 128 ). William found the idea of agasones equas
vexantes in Virgil, if we can believe Bernard Silvester 25, but turned it

25. Bernard Silvestris , Commentum, p. 9, Virgilius, Georg. 3. 23.

56 THE NATURE AND FUNCTION

to his unique kind of naturalistic yet metaphorical explanation of poetic

inception.
William, in fact, informs us of what elements (other causae) are
necessary for satiric attack and moral persuasion: indignatio - « and
so he begins in a satiric manner by crying in indignation » ( « et ita more
satirico ex indignatione clamando incipit » [ P, p. 92 ] ) ; ingenium — « a
natural power of understanding something quickly » ( « naturalis vis
aliquid cito intelligendum » (W, p. 134 ] ); scientia- because many have
knowledge sufficient for reproving , but they do not dare to reprove because
they do not have the freedom » ( « quia multi habent scientiam sufficientem
reprehendendi , nec tam audent reprehendere quia non habent liberatem >>
[W, p. 134 ] ) ; and libertas , though freedom is not essential for artistic
attack . In W we find William ranked these causae in terms of their
value for poetic making : first is, of course , his matter , the people
and evils that provoke him and become the object of attack; second ,
ingenium , then indignatio and , if all fails , knowledge or scientia of things
and of versifying.
We earlier argued that William's assumption that satire is moral
persuasion provides an explanation for and probability for Juvenal's
choice of word, image, reference, and the sequence of the satire. We
also claimed his « moral poetic » takes a philosophic and not merely
casuistical character. We will demonstrate these propositions with two
brief examples. In the extensive gloss on mugitum labyrinthi (pp. 110-
11 , our text) William understands the minotaur myth to be an integument
for a tale of adultery between Pasiphe, Minos' wife, and Taurus, Minos'
cancellarius. The subsequent verses, such as those which include leno
accipit, again refer to adultery, though of another type. The verses
following these all deal with sexual immoralities and adultery, including,
finally, reference to Eliodorus, Nero's cancellarius. William's interpre-
tation of mugitum provided a rationale for Juvenal's selection of the
myth which was not readily apparent, one which was, in a sense, moral ,
yet also in at least one point historical.
While most of William's integumental interpretations are historical
or << naturalistic » in the manner of this previous one, a number of them
carry both historical and broadly philosophical significations. In P
(p. 144) William reads the reference Veneri Martique to signify an immo-
rality of Nero, but its veritas for him is how the good and bad powers of
those stars affect Vulcanus, the « ardour of the mental powers » (fervor
ingenii). It is a disreputable tale, elements of which for William refer
to Nero, but William also sees in it a truth concerning the effect of the
two spheres, the sexual and violent forces, on the ingenium .
The P accessus, in an etymology for satira provides William's second
major assumption concerning poetry:

Satire according to certain ones is called so from the satyr gods

of the groves therefore because they are equal to all. For the
satyrs are naked and witty, they enter by dancing. They imitate
the deeds of men; they have goat-like feet ... the satyrs are witty.
 OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM 57

Satire keeps nothing silent and restrains nothing; those enter by

dancing, this now thence suddenly touches another; this satire just
as those imitates the deeds of men; as foully men act, so foully this
reproves.

Satira secundum quosdam dicitur a satiris diis nemorum eo quod in

proprietatibus omnibus pares conveniant. Satiri enim nudi sunt et
dicaces; saltando incedunt. Imitantur gestus hominum ; caprinos
habent pedes ... dicaces sunt satiri. Satira nihil tacet et nulli
parcet; illi saltando incedunt, hec modo unde statim alium tangit;
hec quemadmodum et illi gestus hominum imitatur, quam turpiter
agunt homines, tam turpiter hec reprehendit (p. 90).

Satire, then, imitates the deeds of men in a manner similar to that in

which the satiri of the woods and groves imitated men's actions; it is a
mirror held up to that fedidum animal which is both caper and, by
analogy, homo. William clearly assumes poetry is imitation of action, but
for him the principle of imitation could not be totally independent of
moral persuasion.
Nevertheless , for Juvenal imitation is a vital principle of his art and
selection of matter, and William refers to that principle at important
moments, such as in the gloss on nam de tot (P, p. 131 ). « Someone
might say 'it is not probable [ i.e. , like a true thing] because you say « I
in the houses of those see so many beautiful and so well arranged
tables, » as if daily the whole family gathers here. To this he says,
'howevermuch this may be, it is not therefore less true what I say, because
they do not sit at these tables. Indeed, in secret on a certain little table
they devour those things which were left to them by ancestors » ( « Diceret
aliquis non est veri simile quod dicis « ego in domibus eorum video
tantas pulcras mensas et tam bene dispositas, » ac si cotidie multa familia
ibi conveniret. Ad hoc dicit quamvis hoc sit non est idcirco minus verum
quod dico, quia non assident mensis illis. Immo secreto quadam parvula
mensa devorant ea que a precessoribus eis relicta sunt » ) . In this passage
William weighs the probability of Juvenal's poetic description in terms of
the truth of representation . He questions the verisimile - probability
and also likeness to true things — of the scene and defends its imitative
probability. Put in the form of a quaestio, the student argues from the
point of view of logic: he sees many tables in the satiric description -
and does not believe that they would be in the cenaculum for the
service of only one person. The teacher says that the scene, though
logically improbable since most families probably used the tables they
had, is nonetheless true in its imitation because of the principle of
selection Juvenal used for scene. Juvenal intended to represent a scene
truthfully for the purpose of creating the effect of an attack on a certain
object: << to lie in empty couches indicts him concerning avarice who
does not admit guests and sends away clients » ( « iacere in toris vacuis
notat eum de avaritia qui non hospites admitebat et clientes expellebat >>
[p. 131 ] ). William understands that Juvenal selected details of descrip-
58 THE NATURE AND FUNCTION

tion to attack a certain kind of person, one who represents avaritia for
William .
On page 173 of our text William uses two mimetic terms when
discussing comedy. He says: « Illis creditur nobis autem non nec mirum
quod scient representare humanum gestum; an melior comedus ad quem
pertinet representare gestus. » Thus the genus of comedy is essentially
the representation of human action. Earlier we noted that for William
satire imitates those same gestus but in a different manner ( <« quam
turpiter agunt homines tam turpiter hec imitatur, [ i.e. reprehendit ] » ).
Thus representare and imitari are two terms for the single nature of the
different kinds of poetic activity, and both comedy and satire, and
apparently all poetry, imitate gestus hominum.
William conceived of imitation not only in terms of a principle of
poetic representation but also as an aspect of generic literary traditions.
In P William identifies Alumnus Aruncae with Lucilius, « the first inventor
of satire whom this [Juvenal ] imitates, » ( « Primus inventor satire quem
iste imitatur » [p. 102 ] ) . Though this assertion is only infrequently
reiterated , it reflects a current concept of the poetic craft and the schools'
practice of imitation of poets in composition exercises. Apparently
imitation of this nature is that kind to which Bernard Silvester's preface
to his Commentum refers, and we also find it in John of Salisbury. P's
concept of imitation of actions, and probability of representation, seems
somewhat unusual in the twelfth century.
Satire and poetry, though, imitate not only the actions of men but
history, physiology, and the physics of the cosmos . It is at this point that
we come to understand the parallel functions of the moral and physical
causalities in the glosae, and the larger relation of philosophia to the
moral philosophy of persuasion. There are, at many points in Juvenal's
satires, physiological confirmations of moral causation. For example,
when in Satire 1 the wealthy man who gluttonously ate the half-raw
peacock dies in the baths, Juvenal expects us to accept this occurance as
confirmation of his immorality. W and P preface William's explication
with differing glosses :

W P

pena, etc. however much men do
not receive punishment for glut-
tony, they receive it by Nature.
This is the punishment, it is
present gluttony
propter pena tamen thus and so
they do things and are not punished
by men, but the divine revenge
punishes them, and by such a
punishment which the natural phy-
sics of things works. He adds
how:

His perception of the intertwining of Natura and ultio divina precedes

elaborate details of the physiology of the man's death: << The passages
now having been blocked , and, thence, suddenly deaths touch <them >
by the permission of God, and nevertheless by physic's working. » The
Latin texts follow:
 OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM 59

W P

Pena etc. quamvis homines non propter pena tamen sic et sic agunt
accipiant vindictam de gulositate, et non puniuntur ab hominibus, sed
Natura tamen accipiunt. Hec est ultio divina punit eos, et pena tali
pena, presens est gulositas quam operatur physica rerum .
Quomodo sudit:

<< meatibus iam obstructis et, inde subite mortes contingunt Dei permis-
sione, et physica tamen operante » (pp. 132-33 ) . While here we find it
explicitly stated, implicitly William claims that physica or Natura functions
in Juvenal's Satires in a manner parallel to the moral cause and effect of
the poems, and provides the reader with a naturalistic system within
which he understands the probabilities of the working of that poetic
world. In a sense, then, he provides a naturalistic or scientific ars poesis.
Another poetic assumption is distinctly rooted in medieval
rhetorical poetics . In the twelfth century literati often conceived of the
poetic process as one of amplification, abbreviation, and the use of figures
of thought and word. Poetry in this tradition they stylistically categorized
into kinds - genres and they generally conceived of it as reshaping
of traditional stories such as we find in myth and popular history. Thus
W reads, clearly in the tradition of amplification and abbreviation, that
<< it is for the poet to extend brief things, to shorten the long » ( « enim
poete brevia dilatare, longa breviare » [ p . 94 ] ) . W identifies and describes
kinds of poetry: commedia, elegia, satira. And W briefly adumbrates the
traditional medieval concept of poetic matter: << poets mix fables with
true things » ( « poete fabulas veris admiscent » [ p. 99 ] ) . W also, in
explaining the source of the assurance (fiducia) of the satiric poet
- « because I was nourished in study and in the gathering of wise men,
and therefore I am able to reprove bad poets » ( « quia nutritus sum in
studio et in conventu sapientum, et ideo viles poetas possum reprehen-
dere » [ p. 96 ] ) — argues from a student's point of view by saying he has
been well schooled and is confident of his judgment. P does not ignore
these terms and definitions, but phrase them differently and generally uses
the concepts in a more sophisticated and rhetorical manner. W preserves
definitions probably current in the schools, ones which easily adapt
themselves to poetic analysis on a simpler level.
In the glosses, therefore, William very explicitly expressed his poetic
assumptions and demonstrated how they explain Juvenal's principles of
selection and the probability of the sequence of material. Each
assumption utilizes specific critical terms and is a separate, unique opinion,
but for William Juvenal's archetectonic or primary structuring principle
is that of moral persuasion.
William's basic poetic assumptions, which we presented above,
necessarily require a « critical lexicon » for their expression and appli-
cation. We encountered several of the terms in our discussion of William's
poetic principles, but each of the clusters of terms in which they are
most easily categorized do not necessarily correspond to any single
60 THE NATURE AND FUNCTION

assumption. For example, one cluster centers around the term integu-
mentum, which has two senses the indirection of attack on historical
personalities, and the covering for moral and philosophic truths assumed
by William to underly and provide cohesion for the satires. Thus we
find in integumental interpretations that William says veritas « lies
under » the fabula. However, under the assumption that poetry is
rhetorical parts amplified and adorned we quoted William in W « poets
mix fables with true things », surely in a sense a school definition, but
closely connected to integumental terms, for the veritas of poetry consists
in the combination of vera with fabulosa. And vera are the elements of
philosophic truth which William assumes to be in the integumental
satires. Perhaps connected to these terms is the triplex lectio which
William expounds elsewhere: historica, physica, and philosophica. All
three are integumental lectiones in Juvenal's satires, and are the main
concerns of Juvenal as well as modes of the satires' action.
Secondly, there is a group of terms which define poetry generally and
satire in particular. On the one hand we have terms for rhetorical ampli-
fication and abbreviation: rhetorical terms such as allegoria, translatio,
circumlocutio, and antepophora; and terms such as dilatare and breviare.
On the other hand, we have terms which describe poetry as imitation and
narrative of action, with such terms as imitatur, gestus, actus, verisimile,
and verum. At one point William uses the three terms actus (action),
materia poete, and relatus (narration) as interrelated critical terms to
describe the nature of Juvenal's satura-farrago. And poetry as moral
ordering is described in terms such as instructio moralis, reprehensio, and
dicit mordaciter.
Another cluster of terms describes the causae of the work and relates
to any of William's major poetic assumptions, though we empha-
sized earlier their role in the assumption that poetry is moral discourse.
The most immediate cause is, for William, the historical particulars of
Nero's reign, and the customs of the rich. They provide, as we saw, much
of the materia of the satires and the spurs which prodded Juvenal.
Indignatio, a second cause, is a response to the historical particulars; it
is a strong emotion which generally arises out of a personal value
system. Third, scientia is, as a cause, not only the knowledge accumulated
by any particular individual author but also the philosophia of the
antique world which is the rationale and dynamic force behind the
discrete phenomena of the universe. William identifies scientia at one
point with materia (p. 134 ). Finally, the author's ingenium is a vital
cause of the satire, which P elaborates in this manner: « < if nature: when
I see these and like things, I am not able to keep from <writing satire >;
I will write even if nature denies. He calls nature the natural mental
power of man. Therefore he says if nature denies, if my mental quickness
did not suffice to writing, nevertheless I would begin out of indignation,
and because indignation without art does not make good verse, he adds
whatever it is able » ( « si natura; cum hec et similia videam, non possum
abstinere ... scribam etiam si natura negat. Naturam vocat naturale inge-
nium hominis. Ergo dicit si natura negat, si non sufficeret ingenium
 OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM 61

meum ad scribendum tamen ex indignatione inciperem, et quia indignatio

sine arte non bonos facit versos, addit qualem-cumque potest » [ p. 117] ).
William closely identifies natura, then, with ingenium and considers ars
dependent upon natura-ingenium. Only an ars based on natura and
ingenium makes good verse. At this point we find William associates a
number of important causae - indignatio, natura-ingenium, and in W,
scientia, as elements or factors of the ars of good verse.
We should draw this study of the language of his psychological ars
poesis a bit further. William closely identifies ingenium with natura, and
both are essential for the ars of good poetry. Winthrop Wetherbee, in
his Platonism and Poetry in the Twelfth Century claims that William , in
his Boethius glosses, links ingenium with the power of imaginatio, both
of which he associates with the first division of the brain, the cellula
phantastica 26. But the two are distinct, for whereas ingenium is a power
of understanding and perceiving something quickly, imaginatio is a power
of the soul by which man perceives the form of an absent thing. Both,
however, are powers of perception, and have a common physiological
sight in the brain. Bernard of Chartres, according to John of Salisbury,
had an even more elaborate, tripartite, theory of ingenium, but it is not
our concern here. The Boethius glosses, then, confirm this almost
naturalistic description of ingenium in P by giving it association with a
part of the brain. Ingenium, in combination with scientia, materia (the
vitia), possibly imaginatio and the knowledge how to make verse provides
the ars of poetry, whereas indignatio and other such causes provide the
moral impetus of satire.
Two other glosses will fill out this discussion of the language of
William's poetic theory. The relation of ingenium and ars is further
defined in the accessus (p. 91 ) . « And shouting matches of this manner
aforesaid are satire, that is the wittier (more ingenious) farmers redacted
[ them ] into art, and they took to reprove metrically » ( « Et huiusmodi
convicia predicta sunt satire, id est agrestes callidiores autem in artem
redigerunt et metrice cepeunt reprehendere » ) . The callidiores are those
with ingenii of a quicker sort. Second, as Theodore Silverstein has
pointed out, the term ingenium was a classroom term, which referred to
the natural ability of understanding, and students were classified by
how << quick » they were. So in his gloss on ferule et nos ergo (p. 102).
William says, « Masters, therefore, considering the slowness of mental
powers (ingenium ) to proceed from blood cooled around the heart, strike
boys in the left hand, which is more close to the heart, with an instru-
ment made from wood of this kind. And so the blood stirred in the
hand pushed other blood, and that other, and so finally that blood
becomes warm which was congeled around the heart, and thus the inge-
nium was aroused » ( « Magistri ergo, considerantes tarditatem ingenii ex
sanguine circa cor cangelato procedere, pueros in sinistra manu , que
magis propinque est cordi , cum instrumento de huius modi arbore facto

26. Winthrop Wetherbee, Platonism and Poetry in the Twelfth Century (Princeton, Prin-
ceton University Press, 1972) , pp. 94-95.
62 THE NATURE AND FUNCTION

percutiebant. Et ita sanguine in manu commotus alium impellebat et ille

alium, et ita donec calefieret sanguis ille qui circa cor congelatus erat
et sic excitaretur ingenium » ) . Thus the ingenium is tied to the physio-
logy of the brain and the circulation, is a term for mental quickness, and
becomes, for William the cause of the art of satire, or at least facilitates it.
The most important causa, ultimately, is Juvenal's materia, which
as we said at one point William identifies with scientia. Let us consider
further the terms he uses to develop his critical lexicon. P, in an
extensive gloss on quicquid agunt, farrago, and ex quo Deucalion (pp. 118-
20) discusses at great length the materia Iuvenalis -— due to its length I
will not quote it here, but it extends through the glosses on votum, timor,
ira, voluptas, and gaudium-- and weighs the question what is the materia
of these satires ? Most are human emotions that make up the farrago,
but they are, in P's extended sense, the vitia, the causes of moral choices
of action, and the result or expression of physiological and physical pro-
cesses. For example, ira is « an accidental heat going forth out of colera
diffused from gall, biting the heart, and is for present evil » ( « calor
accidentale procedens ex colera diffusa a felle mordente ipsum cor, et est
de presenti malo »). He concludes : << this anger <a virtue > is not
Juvenal's materia, but that when it is not against evils » (« hec ira
<virtus > non est Iuvenalis materia, sed illa cum contra vicia non est ... ») .
Voluptas is all of the sensual delights, some good and others not; William
describes them and concludes : << but certain of those allowed, certain
not allowed. The illicit <not allowed > are the matter of Juvenal, of
which certain are evil in respect to action and foul in respect to nar-
ration » ( « sed istarum quedam licite sunt, quedam illicite. Illicite sunt
tantum materia Iuvenalis quarum quedam et spurce sunt actu et fede
relatu ... » ) . William considers the matter of the satires, physica as well
as ethica and eloquentia, to be ordered by Juvenal spurce actu and fede
relatu to accomplish the attack. Action (actus), physiological causation,
and appropriate narration (relatus ) interrelate in making this particular
cause. (William uses actus, actually, more as a synonym for actio than
as distinct. See also page 142 of the text. It can be considered syno-
nymous with gestus, also.)
To this point we have covered two main causes of the glosae: major
characteristics of the Satires themselves, as William understood them ,
and William's critical assumptions and terms, both of which expain why
he wrote the glosses . But of course the glosses are a product of a time, a
place, a certain teacher, produced for a certain audience, and preserved for
certain reasons by students. These historical particulars affected the
character of the glosses as profoundly as did opinions in the mind of the
teacher William, or difficulties of the lectio poetae. What we know of
the transmission of the two versions, W and P, and their characteristics
tells us something of the time and audience, and the students who
preserved them. And John of Salisbury recounts for us Bernard of
Chartres' teaching method which, clearly, William inherited.
John describes in detail the teaching methods of Bernard in chapters
twenty-three and twenty-four of Book One of the Metalogicon. They are
 OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM 63

methods which « William of Conches and Richard the Bishop used in

training their disciples » 27. John recounts Bernard's method as part of
his attack on the Cornificians, and the description is, of course, shaped by
his purpose, but enough of the anecdote remains to enlighten us. It is a
second-hand account, too, but it apparently had been carefully preserved.
Bernard's reading of the « authors » covered certain topics : poetic
rules as the authors followed them; grammatical figures, rhetorical
embellishment, and sophistical argument (the trivium) ; and the relation
of the authors to « other studies » — that is, to the rest of philosophia.
Subsequently John informs us of Bernard's methods: a system of
gradual dispensation in keeping with students' powers; exhortation and
flogging; recitation; declination; religious and moral meditation; and
finally imitation of classical authors. Recitation, declination , and medi-
tation occurred each day in the stated order. Finally, John characterizes
Bernard's method of reading: thoroughness, memorization, selectiveness,
and composition and criticism (collationes).
John does not actually describe the method of the lecture. Perhaps
the praelectio auctorum was, however, a combination of explication and
quaestio. It is well known that the quaestio was the common form of
philosophical and theological lecture and commentary 28. William's
glosae, especially the student reportatio W, preserve such lecture
characteristics as the quaestiones. Apparently, then, the praelectio
inspired recitation, declination, and imitation.
We know that Bernard taught at Chartres, so that we can conjecture
his audience was, for the most part, young novices and town boys.
William, apparently a teacher in Paris as well as Chartres 29, certainly did
not ignore such fundamental grammatical concerns as Bernard found
necessary for his students - - John considered him grammaticus opulen-
tissimus - but shows in his glosses frequently a more sophisticated
method. W and P show some differences on this point, for W tends to
preserve more elements of the lecture. W retains some poetic definitions
that are more in keeping with grammar schools, for they are short,
rhetorical, formulaic. Many glosses are brief notes. W, written around
the text, clearly was preserved as a student aid for the reading of Juvenal's
Satires. W more frequently uses the quaestio, and explains the simple
sense of passages. P, however, a more mature work, deals somewhat
more speculatively and surely with poetic and rhetorical questions. The
characteristics of each reflect their history of preservation. We saw, in
Chapter One, that W probably represents a version of a reportatio of
William's lectures, while P more likely is a student's edition of William's
own version which was published .

27. John of Salisbury, Metalogicon, trans. G. G. McGarry (Berkeley, University of

California Press, 1954), pp. 67-71.
28. Pare, et al., pp. 125-131 .
29. Jeauneau, Glosae, p. 10 ; R. W. Southern, Medieval Humanism and Other Studies
(Oxford, Basil Blackwell, 1970), pp. 61-85.
64 THE NATURE AND FUNCTION

The Chartrian lectio auctorum, then, explains certain characteristics

of William's glosses on the Satire of Juvenal. First, topics discussed in
the glosses - their materia - are those John of Salisbury recounts in his
description of Bernard's praelectiones: the rules the poets followed,
questions related to the trivium and the quadrivium. Second, the
characteristics of the praelectio itself, a few of which we know from
sources such as Paré and Rashdall, such as the quaestio and simple
explication of sense as well as allegorical sententiae, are the gloses'
essential method. Finally, we can envision the place for the lectio Iuve-
nalis in the regimen of the school : the praelectio followed recitation of
the lessons learned from previous lectures, and was followed by gram-
matical exercises, composition imitative of the auctor, and collationes.
What would be the case of William lectured on Juvenal at the schools
in Paris rather than at Chartres ? Powicke, in a long addendum to
Rashdall's The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages, distinguishes
between the ordinary and extraordinary lectures of the Paris schools.
Ordinary lectures, given during the day at stated times, were ordered by
the different schools for the purpose of explicating theology, the writings
of the church fathers, law, and parts of Aristotle's Organon. Designated
students produced reportationes from their masters' lectures which were
subsequently published by stationery companies. Thus, these reportationes
were very accurate transcriptions. Teachers, however, offered to lecture
on other authors which were not part of the ordinary course of lectures,
and these extraordinary lectures were generally rather informal. Such
lectures probably included the lectio poetarum . Whatever reportationes
resulted from these lectures were private student notes and were not gen-
erally published 30. William, then, lectured at either ( or both) Paris and
Chartres and W preserves, probably, a reportatio of those lectures on
Juvenal.
The three major causae which we have discussed this far in our
first inquiry - the character of the Saturae themselves as William
understood them, the critical assumptions and terms William held and
used, and the historical role of magister - determine, along with the
matter inherited from earlier Juvenal glosses, the nature of William's
glosses on Juvenal. These causae, and their individual elements, are the
main determinants for William's selection of matter for his glosses, that
is, they provide the principles of explanation which William used in
explicating Juvenal. By being the determinants of his selection, they
determine the nature of his glosses.
Few modern scholars have tried to define William's poetic and critical
assumptions or his method. Edouard Jeauneau and Peter Dronke both
have tried to formulate a kind of poetic, but for the most part concern
themselves with the philosophical positions they find in the glosses 31 .
While criticism is certainly grounded in philosophical position, we find that

30. Rashdall , Universities , 1, 490.

31. Edouard Jeauneau, « L'usage de la notion d'integumentum travers les gloses
de Guillaume de Conches », AHDLMA 24 ( 1957), 35-100 . Dronke, Fabula, pp. 1-79.
 OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM 65

Jeauneau especially is almost totally concerned with the latter. Jeauneau

formulates integumentum in terms of a covering for philosophic truth
and uses the concept to explicate the method of William's Timaeus glosses.
But integumentum is only a single term, though an important one, in
William's philosophic as well as critical lexicon; Jeauneau intends to
clarify William's philosophical method in the glosses, not a single term.
Jeauneau concerns himself only very briefly with the Juvenal glosses
because they use the term integumentum to denote an historical and moral
correspondence that can have philosophic implications. Such a use of
the term is not very similar to the philosophic technique of the Timaeus
glosses. The Juvenal glosae do preserve integumental interpretations of
the kind Jeauneau describes, but William uses the term itself in the
Glosae as a rhetorical figure.
Peter Dronke, in Fabula, claims that William's Macrobius' glosses
preserve profoundly original contributions to twelfth century concepts of
myth and poetic fictions. He is concerned with « the roles of concept and
image- how they unite and how they act upon and enrich each other—
in certain medieval texts belonging to the sphere of imaginative thought . >>
William's theory of myth as an imaginative vehicle for a variety of truths
is a major base for Dronke's investigations of twelfth-century imaginative
thought and literature.
Dronke provides a great service by reproducing texts of William's
Macrobius glosses. He contends that William, in his glosses on Macrobius'
discussion of fabulae, extends the philosophic (for Macrobius a term
signifying sacred matters ) signification of fables from fabulae which are
<< fabulous narratives under a pious covering » ( « narratio fabulosa sub
pio velamine » ), to almost all kinds of fables, and their signification to
almost any philosophical truth, in direct contradiction to the terms in
which Macrobius sets his limits.
Dronke, however, neglects to distinguish between Macrobius' and
William's points of view and purposes. Macrobius is concerned with
what kinds of fictive discourse « are appropriate to books of philosophy »,
and Macrobius understood such books to be Plato's Republic and Timaeus,
perhaps Aristotle's treatises, and Cicero's Res publica. Boethius' Conso-
latio is on this order. These works express cosmic truths. He concludes
that only fables of a certain seemly sort are appropriate for such treatises.
William, on the other hand, is curious to know whether fables, however
they are used, have any signification other than the literal, and is not
actually very concerned with Macrobius' main distinction of appro-
priateness to books of philosophy and sacred matters.
Dronke claims too much on this point- that William sees integu-
mental or sacred truths in many different kinds of fables - for William
does not claim philosophic truth (of the kind Macrobius envisions) for
those fables which are fictional both in matter and sense (Dronke labels
them B-1 ). William shares Macrobius' opinion that only the kind of fables
which he calls narratio fabulosa (B-2) have in them philosophical truth.
William, in fact, did not actually claim in the In Macrobium that fables
other than those of which Macrobius approved are appropriate for philo-

5
66 THE NATURE AND FUNCTION

sophical treatises. Nor does he claim sacred philosophical truth for the
school poets and their lighter opinions or for Aesop's tales of wolves and
crows. But for William these latter works have their place — an important
place- in the curriculum, and carry truths of a certain moral or natural
sort. And William certainly believes - and this is actually what Dronke
was getting at -— that the poets use fables which have significations other
than literal, whether the signification be scientific, astrological , cosmolo-
gical, moral, or historical. But William, actually, for the most part does
not disagree with Macrobius' stance on fabulous narratives as we find it
in book one of the Commentary on the Dream of Scipio.

Second Inquiry

Our analysis of the causes of William of Conches' Glosae in Iuvenalis

Satiras - the satires' characteristics, William's critical assumptions and
terms, and the historical particulars of the glosses' composition and
transmission- and of opinions of other scholars provides a firm basis
for our second inquiry and for the problem and thesis of our argument.
We wish, at this point, to inquire what effect the combination of the
glosses and the satires achieves. Most scholars approach commentaries
as whole, independent works which they mine for philosophic, critical, or
scholarly opinions. Glosses, especially those which physically surround
on a folio the texts they treat are, however, intimately connected with
those texts. We can take the opinions in the glosses at face value, but
the essential act of the glosses is in their combination with the text they
gloss. We must ask: what effect do these glosses have, interacting with
the satires, as they are being read? How might they alter, add to, or
complicate the satires ? What is the result of their combination ? This
problem asks a more fundamental question which derives from our first
inquiry: what is the effect of the combination of William of Conches'
poetic theories, his intellectual conceptualization of poetry and satire,
with the satires ?
Such questions need as a basis for their answer a comprehensive poetic
conception of the effect of the Saturae. Juvenal's satires are a panorama
of action, custom, and human desires, of the first century, A.D. The
satires achieve the effect of attack by organizing these into combinations
which will outrage commonplace moral values. The author Juvenal chose
a sequence of visual, imitative descriptions which would sustain the
impression of verisimilitude, and yet carefully selected details to sustain
the effect of attack on certain historical particulars. At no point does
Juvenal say that we should change, or think or act differently; rather, he
assumes we hold his point of view and consequently share the pleasure
of the satires' attack on its object.
The effect of attack on historical particulars, then, is the poetic prin-
ciple which organizes certain mimetic materials. Attack (blame) is, also,
a type of epideictic rhetoric, so satire consequently partakes of rhetorical
strategies , the choices and consequences of human action. Moral
choices - choices of action — are inevitably embedded in the matter of the
 OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM 67

satires, and they are ordered by the author for the purpose of controlling
the response of the reader. That ordering Juvenal does to enhance the
artistic effect of attack, the sharpness he wanted to achieve in attacking
certain historical particulars.
William notes the main thrust of attack and reproof in Juvenal's
satires, but he posits as his architectonic assumption that the satires are
moral persuasion . He saw in a moral-historical interpretation of the
satires an explanation for the various parts of the satires, their probability
and necessity, and for the selection of diction, image, and reference.
William may be understood to be expressing the moral values and com-
monplaces, in twelfth-century terms, that Juvenal relied upon to be held
by his audience so that he might create effective artistic attacks.
We certainly do not deny, then, that Juvenal's matter is moral and the
effectiveness of his attack depends, in part, on the moral assumptions
shared by author and reader. These assumptions help us judge the
actions represented in the poetic fiction and understand the object of
attack. However, Juvenal's end is not persuasion (rhetoric ) but the
effect of an attack (poetry). The point of greatest pleasure and interest
for Juvenal and his audience were the historical particulars attacked, and
the satiric art, the spectacular effects of style and representation, used to
achieve the effect of attack.
William, as we have noticed earlier, clearly understands that the
object of the satires of Juvenal is historical : specific customs and
personages. Thus one principle of explanation William employs is that
of historical integument. But William, in his glosses, does not limit his
identification of Juvenal's objects of attack to these historical particulars,
but broadens the objects mainly to include what he calls physica and
philosophica. William, I believe, thought Juvenal hid the objects of his
attack, and by unfolding the hidden objects from their covering he
explains the art of the satires, and to explain why Juvenal included this
word, that allusion, even a whole section, he found that he needed more
than an historical reading, that the object of attack and the art included
natural and moral philosophy.
William was part of a tradition of moralization, for Conrad of Hirsau,
the Accessus ad Auctores, Bernard Silvester, and earlier writers all tended
to moralize the classics, whatever genre they glossed , because the classical
writers were texts to be taught in school. William always was, by the
inevitability of time's passing, eleven centuries distant from Juvenal's
world, and however much he was fascinated by it, he had only so much
information about it. Consequently, he was forced by the needs of
explication to construct a substitute world with which he could explain
the Saturae. Finally, William's own interests lead him to his major prin-
ciples of explanation.
William consequently created a complete cosmos for the satiric world
of Juvenal (and for other of his works) which makes the sequence of the
parts of the satires probable and necessary. To do so William creates a
<< three-fold reading » ( « triplex lectio » ) : historica, philosophica, and
physica. In Dronke's Fabula are texts transcribed from a Florentine
68 THE NATURE AND FUNCTION

manuscript, which he believes preserve William's teachings, that explain

myths in these terms (Ms. Firenze, Bibl. Naz. Conv. Soppr. 1.1.28 ) 32.
Folio 50 r-v:

Concerning Hymen the reading is threefold: historic or fabulous,

scientific, and philosophic. According to history Hymen of Athens
was a youth who equalled a virgin in respect to form, but in love
of this certain one equal in respect to beauty, but superior in respect
to nobility ... according to fable, in truth he is the son of Bacchus
and Cypridis or of Camena, that is, Venus, and is the god of
weddings. according to science Hymen is a little membrane in
which the homunculus is conceived, certainly a womb, which
contains seven cells inscribed with the impression of the human
form ... acording to philosophy in truth expound thus : through
Hymen take the natural power of propagation, certainly loves, which
they love mutually in glory ... this is the Holy Spirit, who pours into
all things a love of ... This one is called the god of marriages.

De Hymeneo triplex est lectio: historica, sive fabulosa, physica,

et phylosophica. Secundum historiam Hymeneus Atheniensis
Secundum
iuvenis virginem equabat pulcritudine, et amore cuiusdam forma
parem, sed nobilitate superiorem inarserat ... secundum fabulam
vero filius est Bachi et Cypridis seu Camene, id est Veneris, et est
deus nuptiarum ... secundum physicam Hymeneus est membranula,
in qua concipiuntur puerperia, matrix videlicet, qua septem
continet cellulas impressione humane forme signatas ... secundum
phylosophiam vero sic expone. Per Hymeneum accipe vim propa-
gationis naturalem, videlicet amores, quos in gloria invicem
diligunt ... hic est spiritus sanctus, qui quendam caritatis ardorem
obnibus rebus infundit. Hic deus nuptiarum dicitur.

We encounter such lectiones throughout the Glosae in Iuvenalem, but

not usually in such a schematized fashion. In his gloss on nota magis
(p. 96, our text) William presents a very similar scheme of logica (in
W, philosophia), physica, and poetica. These three manners of reading
a poem seem to me to be responses to the three main modes of action of
the satires (as William understood them). These provided the systems
which create the cosmos of the satires within which they function.
The triplex lectio is hardly unique, however, for Homeric critics of
late classical times interpreted their texts similarly: a moral rationali-
zation, Euhemeristic historical interpretation, and cosmological or physical
interpretation of the gods 33. But what is strikingly different here is that
William is not really trying to explain away or rationalize what was pagan,

32. Dronke, Fabula, pp . 114-115.

33. Jean Seznec, La survivance des dieux antiques (London, Warburg Institute, 1940),
Chapters 1, 2, 3.
 OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM 69

but to break open new significances, or at least ones which were useful
or important for twelfth-century thinkers.
The effect of the combination of the glosses with the Satires, then,
is to shift the effect from one primarily of artful attack on historical
particulars to one of attack on objects which are much more diverse and
philosophical. By this assertion we mean that by combining, through
the sequential particular glossing of words and phrases in the satires, his
critical and intellectual system ( that is, his poetic ) with the poetry of the
satires, William shifts the poetic effect from historical attack to a more
diverse range of attack, and organizes it by shifting the poetic pleasure in
attack to a rhetorical, moral persuasion. The glosses certainly are a
moral reading; however, in my opinion, they are so as much for the
purpose of explanation of the functioning and order of the satires in a
convincing fashion as for simple moral exhortation. By the combination
of the two works William shifts the objects of attack from ones strictly
historical and particular to the three-fold object — the particular historical ;
the universal moral and philosophical, and universal physical laws.

Investigation of the Interaction of the

Glosae with the Satirae

How do the Glosae in Iuvenalis Satirae interact with the Satirae, and
to what effect? The glosses affect our perception and understanding of
the satires in three main ways: first, they supply for us poetic and
critical assumptions which we carry with us throughout the reading of
the satires; second, they conveniently break the satires into parts in order
that we might see the sequence of stages of Juvenal's « argument » and
its rhetorical organization; third, the glosses interpret individual passages
in a manner that informs us but also controls our response.
Juvenal begins Satire 1 ex abrupto, and we only encounter his critical
opinions much later in the satire. The immediate effect of the beginning
of the satire is a powerful indignation - at almost everything Roman—
which catches us up in its sweep. Approaching the satires through
William's glosses, though, we carry with us important assumptions: that
<< agit ergo hoc modo reprehendenda ipsa vitia, hac utilitate ut auditorem
retrahat a vitiis ». We know the matter we will encounter - vitia
Romanorum , the period- tempore Neronis, and the nature of satire.
These definitions direct us from the very beginning of the satires .
William's first gloss - basically an introduction to Satire 1— divides
the satire into parts in terms of what those parts do, and analyzes the
strategy of attack and the role of the satire in Book I of Juvenal's
work. The satire, first, reprehends poets who uselessly write. Second,
it shows why Juvenal wrote this kind of poem rather than some other
kind. Finally, Satire 1 acts as a prologue to the rest of the Satires.
Juvenal's strategy of attack is powerful and yet simple: << but that he
might show no one restrains himself, he reproves himself concerning
too much taciturnity, because he who does not restrain himself, how
70 THE NATURE AND FUNCTION

can he restrain me or you? » ( « Sed ut ostendat neminem se parcere,

reprehendit se ipsum de nimia taciturnitate quia qui sibi non parcit, mihi
vel tibi quomodo parcet? » [ W, p . 92 ] ). Characteristic of the art of
satire is indirection of attack and, for William, a rhetorical strategy of
moral persuasion based upon the ethical appeal of a created persona.
The gloss on reponam is an example of our third type of gloss, but
carries the characteristics of the first type also. Vexatus and reponam,
rather common words which we normally might take to mean « he- the
persona - having been harried by bad poets, never, however, gives them
back their due »>. But Juvenal makes the terms at one and the same
time physiological and also poetic : << reponere is a characteristic of
giving birth. numquam, that is I do not give birth, as if he said, « I now
conceived in my heart (desire ), » and according to this vexatus follows
well, because it was the manner of horse drivers to prod mares before
giving birth, so that, the pores would be opened by heat, they might give
birth more easily » ( « reponere proprium est parturiencium . nunquam id
est non parturiam quasi diceret iam concepi in animo, et secundum hoc
bene sequitur vexatus quia mos erat agosonum ante partum equas vexare
ut, ex calore aperirentur pori, facilius parerent » [P, W concludes « he
shows himself to have been prepared for reproving » ( « ostendit se
paratum esse ad reprehendendum » ). We conclude that he is explaining
the birth of the poet as well as of the satire itself.
Such an interpretation radically alters our reading of these rather
commonplace words, and at the same time explains organically the nature
of the causa compositionis: << Thence he adds the cause is just for
reproving because he had been harrassed by the prolixity of those >>
« deinde subiungit iustam causam esse reponendi quia sepe vexatus est
(<
<
illorum garulitate » ) . We now have many of the major terms and
assumptions that we will need to read the rest of the satire.
Thus these three types of comments occur at the very beginning of
the Glosae and recur in varying combinations throughout the work.
William tries in the glosses to sustain the poetic assumptions of our
approach while at the same time explain in various ways the necessity
or appropriateness of the passages. A most simple and yet very
important function of the glosses is to provide information. Pages 93
and 94, with their descriptions of genres of poetry and etymologies, and
Roman scribal customs, provide explanations of passages which make
their reference clearer for us . We can understand precisely on what
grounds certain customs and literary genres are being attacked .
We encounter in the gloss on nota magis another combination of types
of glosses and it (and subsequent glosses ) provides explanations for the
choice of mythological and classical references, and for the sequence of
parts of the poem . With nota magis mihi William first notes its rhetorical
character - facit antepophoreram - which is a reply to an unasked
question, and then proceeds: because concerning himself he who
reprehends others ought to feel well , therefore Juvenal shows himself to be
such a one who both is able and ought to reprove, commending himself
in logic (philosophy), and physics (natural philosophy), and poetics.
 OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM 71

First he therefore commends himself in philosophy through this ... because

he says he knows the grove of Mars » ( « quia de se bene sentire debet qui
alios reprehendit, idcirco Iuvenalis ostendit se talem esse qui et possit et
debeat alios reprehendere, commendans se in logica et physica et poetica.
Primum ergo commendat se in logica per hoc quod dicit se cognosse
lucum Martis » [ P, p . 96 ] . W and P indicate the etymologies and tra-
ditions of lucus Martis which support such an interpretation. P continues
with its identification of domus with conscientia poete. Juvenal included
references to antrum Vulcani and quid agant venti, William suggests, to
indicate << through this he may indicate he also is strong in physical
science, indicating he knows what the winds do, and the lightning, bolts,
and thunder » ( « per hoc notet se iterum valere in physica, innuens se
scire quid agant venti et fulgura et corruscationes et tonitrua » [P, p. 99 ] ) .
William, of course, commends himself as a commentator by glosses of
such length and erudition, but even more William provides a whole,
complete explanation of the causal relationships of wind, fire, sound, and
the transmutations of the elements. In a sense he provides for us a
natural cosmology within which at a certain level the world of the satires
function.
Finally, William claims that Juvenal included the reference to quas
torqueat umbras — the three judges of hell: << because he knows the tales
he commends himself in poetic matters » ( « se fabulas nosse commendat
se in poetica » ), as with devehat furtivae auream: « through which he
does not keep silent that he is good in poetic matters » ( « per quod se
valere in poetica non tacet » [ p. 100 ] ). William, then, provides with
this explanation first the probable reason for references from nota mihi
magis to Frontonis, second, an interpretation of the significance
- allegorical, physical, moral-of the references, and ties them together
as the satiric strategy of Juvenal to « commendans se in logica, physica,
et poetica » , so that « ostendit se talem esse qui et possit de debeat alios
reprehendere ».
Begining with the glosses from Quantas iaculetur and extending to si
vacat (pp. 100-03) William develops a series of integumental and allegorical
interpretations which focus on the process of education. The Veritas of
the reference to Monicus lies in that Prometheus represents the << childish
sight and pride » ( « puerilis visus et superbia » ), which has eyes only for
« the consideration of earthly things » (consideratio temporalium).
<<
Ulysses represents the « wise wanderer » (sapiens peregrinator ) who
despises these concerns. Frontonis and subsequent glosses on marmora,
columnae, and so on represent allegorically through plane trees
understand students who are making headway, the marbles, the hard
headed [students ] » ( « allegorice per platanos intelligere discipulos pro-
vectores, per marmora duros » [ W, p. 101 ] ) . P continues the analogies :
the columnae are magistri — « understand masters harrassed by frequent
questions, you are able to understand through plane tree which is a tall
and fruitless tree those who want to seem wise and are not » ( « intellige
magistros crebis interrogationibus vexatos; potes per platanum que est
arbor alta et infructuosa illos intelligere qui sapientes volunt videri et
72 THE NATURE AND FUNCTION

non sunt »). With et nos ergo William explains the physiological function
of the ferula magistri: << they strike the boys in the left hand, and so the
blood moved ... and thus the quickness of mind is aroused » ( « percu-
tiebant ... pueros in sinistra manu ... et ita sanguis commotus ... et sic
excitaretur ingenium » [p. 101 ] ). Equos become the ingenium, and the
placidi are « rebellious to reasons » (rebeles rationibus ) . He concludes:
<< he teaches also in what manner we ought to hear, certainly that we not
be rebellious and inattentive » (« docet etiam qualiter audire debeamus,
scilicet ut non simus obstrepentes et inatentes »> [p . 103 ] ).
William, using integumental interpretation, physiological causation,
and simpler explication of sense, developed a consistent explanation of
the argument of the satire for these lines ( 1.12-21 ) which showed the
necessity or at least the probability of Juvenal's selection of references,
style, words, and images. Having concluded with an interpretation of hoc
campo as hec materia and Alumnus as Lucilius (p . 103 ), William begins
at 1.22 cum tener a second major section: << he promised he was going
to show why preferably he would write satire than other poetry. Lo
why: when the soft eunuch ... » ( « promiserat se ostensurum quare potius
satiram quam aliud scriberet. Ecce quare: cum tener spado... » ). The
glosses which follow explain why Juvenal preferably wrote satire and
explain, by precisely identifying Roman customs and personages, why
Juvenal reprehended them.
William concentrated most of his glosae on the first Satire, and a
large part of his interest is focussed on the first twenty or thirty lines.
They are lines crucial to the whole of Book 1 and they, and even more
so Satire 1 , act as a preface and embody the essential character, method,
and assumptions of Juvenal's work.
With exul ab octava (p. 108 ) — 1.49 — we encounter a third major part
of this satire, and a major characteristic of William's interpretation. At
this point William develops an integumental interpretation of the glosses
which consists of historical identifies, in the main Nero, Maecenas,
Eliodorus, and Paris. While such an interpretation is not uncommon
- most medieval Juvenal glosses include at least some historical
identities the use of such an interpretation which incorporates many of
the details of the satires and explains the method of attack is rather
unique (translated on p. 54): << exul ab octava alia causa quare scribit
satiram, scilicet gulositas imperatoris; sed quia non est ausus reprehendere
illum notat per integumentum » (p . 108 ). With mugitum (pp. 110-111 )
William begins, by an integumental interpretation in which Minos'
chancellor or secretary Taurus committed adultery with Pasiphe, a
series of interpretations based on prostitutes (meretrices) and pimps
(lenones), adultery and sexual immorality, which culminates (pp. 113-114)
with the meretrices and their puer Automedon which William identifies
as Nero, and the rich man (p . 114) « borne by six necks » (sexta cervice
feratur) whom William claims is «< Eliodorus, who was the secretary of
the emperor » ( « Eliodorus qui cancellarium erat imperatoris ... ». Elio-
dorus, like Taurus, was an emperor's cancellarius. Maecenas, also a friend
of Nero, is mentioned at this point.
 OF THE GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM 73

The historical integument, however, though it is a principle of

explanation of Juvenal's selection of his matter, is for William a series of
actions which outrage us with their immorality and are its example and
the object of his attack. Maecenas represents pride (superbia) , Nero
effeminacy, and Eliodorus pilfering and corruption.
Pages 114-118 gloss various customs and reformulate certain poetic
assumptions. In the gloss on si natura negat, which we considered earlier,
William identifies natura with ingenium, and suggests ars is dependent on
natura-ingenium. If natura, which is meum ingenium, non sufficeret,
nevertheless indignatio will begin the satire. But indignatio without ars
does not make good verse. I believe William identifies ingenium with
ars here, by such reasoning if ingenium fails us, indignatio will suffice, but
it lacks ars, which by deduction, ingenium supplies, because indignatio by
itself does not make good verse. Scientia (« per sciendum » W) lurks
among these terms, essential to making poems yet not really sufficient.
At one point William equates materia with scientia. After reformul-
ating his poetic assumption, he provides a thorough analysis of the
matter of Juvenal, defined in physical, logical, and moral terms (pp . 118-
19). William provides a description of the interlinked physical and
emotional cosmos in which Juvenal's satiric characters choose and act.
William, as I proposed earlier, defines Juvenal's matter so: << Illicite
tantum sunt materie Iuvenalis quarum quedam et spurce actu et fede
relatu . » Subsequently the reference in 1. 81 to Deucalion William
interprets integumentally as a reference to the instruction of ignorant,
rocklike , men.

The glosses for pages 120-132, for the most part, are close readings of
the sense of the text, and mainly concerned with Roman customs which
had been abused by the rich for their own profit. William, on pages 132-134,
carefully defines the satire's inter-related physiological and moral systems ,
both interpretating individual verses and adumbrating poetic assumptions.
Those glosses covering the end of the satire mix integumental inter-
pretations of historical and poetic significance .
The most complete example of a gloss incorporating such themes
is William's glosses on « poison to uncles » patruis aconita (pp. 136-137) in
which, by an integumental interpretation, William identifies the rich man
as Nero, the tribus patruis his three magistri — Seneca and two others —
and the aconita both the tale of Hercules and Cerberus and, « the truth
that lies under » (subest veritas ) , the « earthly concerns which they put
after these others, are the cause of death of the soul's (death) »
(<< temporalia que ab istis postponuntur aliis sunt causa mortis et anime » ) .
Hercules ― wise man (sapiens ) and « by understood wisdom » (cognita
sapientia) — draws Cerberus, whose three heads represent the three
continents , to this light of sapientia and forces him to expell the temporalia
which is aconita or venena. We might be inclined to identify the three
heads with the three magistri, but also, in some way, with Hercules . The
three themes of Nero, teacher-pupil, and poetic fabula combine here
and continue to the end of the satire , for William continues to identify
74 THE NATURE OF THE GLOSSES

indirect references to Nero, analyze the materia, libertas, and ingenium-ars

of satire, and interpret passages in terms of the function of teaching.
William's Glosae, then, are a close reading of the Satire in which he
provides the poetic assumptions as well as interpretations which explain
the parts of the satire, their function, and their necessary interrelation.
In part he needed only to explicate the text to do so; on the other hand,
at many points only by integumental, physical, or historical explanations
can he show the probability and sufficient cause for the individual
references, customs, images, and scenes. Not the least they sustain a
moral interpretation directed toward persuasion through focussing the
effect of the satires. Finally, the glosses are William's close, intense
scrutiny of a work of art and a document of classical culture and learning.
We found that William emphasized certain major concerns in the
first satire, especially those of the good and bad poets and the role of
the poet, the nature of satire, historical personalities and Roman customs,
the teacher-student relationship, and the physiological, physical expression
of moral causation. William found at least suggestions of these topics
in the satires, but he emphasized these issues in part because of the
nature of his audience. The glosses were probably the basis of a lecture
on the satires he gave to students, probably at Chartres but possibly at
Paris, to whom William would want to emphasize poetic questions,
classical culture, physical and physiological questions, moral issues , but
especially theories of teaching and learning. The lecture, much like
Bernard's, provided opportunities to address such questions while at the
same time the chance to break the poem into its parts, to explain its
references, images, scenes, and to show the probability of the sequence
of those parts, lines, images , and references .
 CHAPTER III

THE CAREER AND WRITINGS OF WILLIAM OF CONCHES

Modern scholars have found little evidence from which to write a

biography of William of Conches, and most of what we know about him
comes from references to him made by contemporaries and students.
We do know, certainly, that William was tutor to the future Henry II of
England when Henry was a young prince living in Normandy. In the
preface to his Dragmaticon William addresses his royal patron, the Duke
of Normandy, and proposes to teach him and his sons about what pertains
to knowledge 34. Henry, the son, resided in Bristol through the year
1146 so William could only have been his tutor from 1147-1149 35. From
its preface we surmise that the work can be dated from this period of
royal service.
In a preface in the Dragmaticon William states that he taught — else-
where, no doubt - twenty years and more before he had retired to his
present position 36. We can, consequently, date the beginnings of William's
teaching career as early as 1120. If John of Salisbury's career was typical
of the education of a twelfth-century scholar 37, William probably studied
for a period of ten to twelve years, most likely with Bernard of Chartres
and various Parisian masters, before he himself began to teach. He was,
therefore, probably thirty years of age when he began his professorial
career. He was born, then, around 1090 though some scholars have
placed it nearer to 1080 38. In the Dragmaticon William claims Norman

34. William of Conches , Dragmaticon sive Dialogus de substantiis physica confectus a

Wilhelmo Aneponymo philosopho, ed. G. Gratarolus (Strasbourg, 1567 ; rep . Frankfurt,
Minerva, 1968) , p. 4.
35. Reginald L. Poole, « The Masters of the Schools of Paris and Chartres in John of
Salisbury's Time », ELH 35 ( 1920), 334.
36. Dragmaticon, p . 210.
37. John of Salisbury, Metalogicon, ed . C. C.J. Webb (Oxford , Oxford University Press ,
1929), 1.5 and 2.10.
38. Poole, p. 334. For the date 1180, see Charles Clemencet and François Clément, eds . ,
Histoire littéraire de la France (Paris , Imprimerie nationale, 1860) , 12, 455 , and Antoine
Clerval , Les écoles de Chartres au Moyen Age (Paris, A. Picard , 1895) , p . 181 .
76 THE CAREER AND WRITINGS

birth and, since he is called « of Conches », there is no reason to doubt he

came from that small town near Evreux 39.
The date of William's death is as much conjecture as is that of his
birth. Alberic of Three Fountains in his Chronicle mentions William in
his entry for 1154, the year Henry II became king of England : « in
the time of this (event ?) Master William of Conches was regarded a
philosopher of great repute » ( « huius tempore magister Guilelmus de
Conchis philosophus magni nominis habitus est » ) 40. The chronicler gives
no reason for mentioning William, but Alberic possibly associated William
with his student Henry. By that time William was at least sixty-four
years old ; and since he left no later evidence of survival we can conclude
either that he died soon after or gave up writing and teaching.
We are relatively certain of only one date in William's life other than
those associated with Prince Henry. John of Salisbury, in the second
book of his Metalogicon, says he spent three years studying with
William 41. Schaarschmidt and Poole figured the years were 1137/38 to
1140/41 , and placed the event, again by deduction, in Chartres 42. Though
no modern scholar disputes the dates, R. W. Southern disagrees with these
earlier intellectual historians over the location 43; Peter Dronke, in a
recent and very useful article, upholds the earlier position 4. Be that as
it may, in 1141 William of Saint Thierry attacked William of Conches in
the published « letter » to Bernard of Clairvaux, « Concerning the errors
of William of Conches » (De erroribus Guilelmi de Conchis) to which the
preface of the Dragmaticon is a direct response 45. Apparently this and
other attacks forced William to retire to private teaching.
From our reconstruction of William's life we can draw certain probable
conclusions. William was educated and taught during the period known
as the twelfth-century Renaissance . He was probably associated as a
student, teacher, friend, or adversary with most of the major Parisian
and Chartrian masters of his time, as well as with masters from provincial
towns. He was indebted to the humanistic Neo-platonism of the school
of Chartres for his philosophical outlook, and to twelfth-century Chris-
tianity and its concepts of creation, order, and salvation for his under-
standing of the meaning of the universe. He was part of an identifiable
tradition of teachers: probably the discipulus of Bernard of Chartres
and possibly Abelard, the magister of Henry II, John of Salisbury,
Petrus Helias and many others 4%. He was a systematic and at times
original thinker and writer.

39. Dragmaticon, p. 210.

40. Alberic of Three Fountains , Chronicles, in Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Scrip-
tores 23, 842.
41. Metalogicon, 1.5 and 2.10.
42. Poole, pp . 321-40.
43. Southern, pp. 61-85, esp . p . 72.
44. Peter Dronke, « New Approaches to the School of Chartres », Anuario de Estudios
Medievales 6 ( 1969) , 123.
45. The letter is in PL 180, 333-40; for dating see Jean M. Dechanet, William of Saint
Thierry, the Man and his Work (Springfield, Mass . , Cistercian Press , 1972) , p. 63 , n. 73.
46. Metalogicon, 2.10 . John implies William was Bernard's student .
 OF WILLIAM OF CONCHES 77

Any other events and periods in William's life are at this point in
scholarship no more than the conjecture of modern scholars. It seems
probable that William spent considerable time as a student in Paris;
neither Chartres nor Conches are far from that great intellectual center
where William of Champeaux and Abelard, among others, taught. We
have no evidence, however, of his teaching in Paris, though R. W. Southern
argues that such is the case from John of Salisbury's account, the same
account from which Poole and others drew an opposite conclusion 47.
Charma claims William held a chair at the « première université du
monde ! » late in his career 48. The details of William's life, then, remain
unknown; we have only very slight evidence of his life dates and
activities.

Writings

Jeauneau, in the preface to his edition of William's Timaeus glosses 49,

established a useful working chronology of those works by William that
we presently accept as authentic. We will briefly recount it. We know,
first, that the Dragmaticon was William's revision, produced in 1147-49, of
the De philosophia mundi ; as we noted earlier we can date the work from
references in its prologue.
Tullio Gregory, in his work Anima mundi, dates the other well known
systematic work, the De philosophia mundi, in the « first decade of
William's scholarly career » 50, when he was, probably, little more than
thirty. The Philosophia, then, was written probably after the year 1120,
most likely between 1125 and 1130 51. Jeauneau places earlier than the
Philosophia, the Glosae in Boetium and the Glosae in Macrobium. All
three are << works of his youth »>. The Boethius glosses, Jeauneau points
out, indicate that the Macrobius glosses had not yet been written, and
both, according to him, show no sign of Arabic medical and scientific
theories 52. He believes the Priscian glosses, in their first redaction, were
written soon after the Philosophia, since in the Philosophia he expresses
his intention to write those glosses 53.
It is difficult to place the Glosae in Iuvenalem in this chronology
precisely. The Glosae follow both the Boethius glosses and the Philosophia
to which the In Iuvenalem refer, but they seem to precede the Timaeus
glosses; whether or not the Priscian glosses (in their first redaction)
precede them is difficult to say for W, clearly they do for P.

47. Southern, p. 68.

48. Antoine Charma, Guillaume de Conches, notice biographique, littéraire, et philo-
sophique (Paris , 1857) , p . 4.
49. Jeauneau, Glosae, p. 14.
50. Tullio Gregory, Anima mundi, la filosofia di Guglielmo di Conches e la Scuola di
Chartres (Firenze, G. C. Samson, 1958 ) , p . 7.
51. See also Theodore Silverstein, « Guillaume of Conches and Nemesius of Emessa »> ,
Harry Austryn Wolfson Jubilee Volumes, 2 vols . (Jerusalem, American Academy of Jewish
Research, 1965), 2, 719-34.
52. Jeauneau, Glosae, p. 13.
53. William of Conches, De philosophia mundi, in PL 172, 100-102.
78 THE WRITINGS

William, then, probably composed the Juvenal glosses after 1130, but
we can, perhaps, settle most satisfactorily on the decade of the 1130's, a
period when he, conjecturally, was teaching at Chartres. The W version
was probably produced early - before the Plato and Priscian glosses.
The P version of the Juvenal glosses seem to come after those two other
glosses, so that they are relatively late - perhaps 1140. The Dragmaticon
and the second redaction of the Priscian glosses are of a date later than
the Timaeus glosses in Jeauneau's scheme, and comprise his << works of
old age ». In conclusion, it seems quite possible that William produced
works other than the Timaeus and Juvenal glosses in the years 1130-1147,
but except for a possible gloss on Martianus Capella we know of
nothing 54.
What characteristics do the works other than the Glosae in Iuvenalis
Satiras display? Scholars generally class his writings into the syste-
matic works, and the glosses. Such a distinction is mainly one of their
organization and method , since William dealt with many of the same
problems in both types of his writings. In general, William endeavored
in his writing to draw on the classical philosophical traditions of Neo-
platonist cosmology, and Aristotelian logic, in conjunction with his
Christian faith, for explanations of phenomena. He was also one of the
earliest scholars in Northern France to intermix the physiological and
scientific traditions of Salerno and Toledo with the more traditional ones
just mentioned. The philosophical, scientific, and theological traditions
with which he was in contact provided for him a variety of modes of
thought and means of explanation for phenomena of the universe, which
he addresses in his Philosophia and Dragmaticon, and for the ideas and
art of various classical and late classical works which he studied and
taught: Plato's Timaeus, Macrobius, Boethius, Priscian, Juvenal, and
possibly Martianus Capella.
His works, though, are essentially Christian and moral, but preoccupied
with systematic scientific and mythical explanation. William of Conches
did not think that these systems had powers of explanation independent
of Christian faith. He did not consider these « traditions » either to be in
opposition to or equal to faith. Nor was his work primarily a matter of
synthesizing Christianity and classical thought. William's faith in God
provided an explanation of the world's existence, but he willingly explained
phenomena of this world by means of his own common sense, and with
the help of thought systems preserved by classical philosophies and
various medieval sciences.
In the De philosophia mundi 55, the first and most important syste-
matic work, probably composed in the third decade of the twelfth
century, William attempts no less than to describe and explain the
configuration of the whole cosmos and the dynamics of its origin and

54. Dronke, Fabula, pp. 114-118. Martin Grabmann tried to attribute the Compendium
philosophiae to William but it is, clearly, the work of a disciple, as Tullio Gregory shows:
Sull'attribuzione a Guglielmo di Conches ... », pp . 119-125.
55. PL 172, 1-102.
 OF WILLIAM OF CONCHES 79

sustenance. The work is conventional in its attribution of creation to

God, though it distinguishes the persons of the Trinity in respect to their
powers and roles (a position he would later withdraw) 5%. In the
Philosophia William presents an orderly universe which includes spheres,
ranks of angels and demons, and a systematic organization of the earth.
He presents a somewhat original theory of elements. He concentrates on
creation, the heavens, and the human microcosm.
The Philosophia is not essentially an encyclopedia nor is it primarily
a collection of facts and other men's opinions. It is, rather, a careful
explanation of the causes and function of the world and its parts.
Alexander Neckam, a philosopher of the second half of the twelfth
century, wrote a De naturis rerum which, for comparison, is a good
example of a descriptive encyclopedia of about the same time. He
organized the work in a somewhat similar fashion, mentions many of
the same things, but in reality, the De naturis is an extended catalogue
which demonstrates that Neckam had only a passing concern for the
causation, relation, and function of things 57. It appears Neckam wanted
to list as many things as possible in a significant order; William, in
contrast, sought physical and philosophical explanations for phenomena.
After eight hundred years we find much of the Philosophia superseded by
modern scientific explanation, but its arguments, taken by themselves, are
sometimes quite reasonable.
The Dragmaticon sive dialogus de substantiis physicis is for the most
part a revision of the earlier work 58, which William completed a quarter
century after the Philosophia. William sought in it to eliminate those
heretical opinions which William of Saint Thierry and others attacked,
and to devise a dialogue useful to him as tutor to the two young princes.
Though most of the matter of the two works is quite similar, Ynez
O'Neill has shown that William added new material and possibly used
several new sources in the revision 59. Generally, in the Dragmaticon,
William devotes much more space to analysis of astronomical and phy-
siological problems than he had done in the Philosophia, and does so in
much greater detail.
William's third systematic treatise, the Moralium dogma philoso-
phorum 60, is a collection of maxims of the moral philosophers, parti-
cularly those of Cicero and Seneca, woven into a treatise. The schema
by which he organizes these excerpts comes from Cicero's De officiis
1.3.9-10; a consideration concerning the noble (virtuous ), the profitable,
and the conflict of both » ( « deliberatio de honesto, de utili , et de

56. Dragmaticon, pp. 5-7.

57. Alexander Neckam, De naturis rerum libri duo, ed. Thomas Wright, Rolls Series No.
34 (London, Longmans, Green, 1863).
58. Vernet, pp. 252-55.
59. Inez V. O'Neill, « William of Conches' Description of the Brain », Clio Medica 3
(1968), 203-15, esp. pp. 212-15.
60. John Holmberg, ed., Moralium dogma philosophorum de Guillaume de Conches
(Uppsala, Almquist and Wiksell's, 1929).
80 THE WRITINGS

conflictu utriusque » ) 61. William adds a number of the minor subdivisions

but generally preserves Cicero's system. Honestum embraces the four
cardinal virtues: prudentiam, iusticiam, fortitudinem, and temperantiam;
he divides and redivides each. Utilis includes bona animi, bona corporis,
and bona fortune, each again divided to the point of exhaustion. Division
by distinction is the method he chose to analyze the character of these
virtues and « goods ». The result is a kind of static, schematized know-
ledge of a branch of philosophy, in effect an ars moralis. The treatise is,
curiously, a completely secular, almost « courtly » treatment of morality.
We can conjecture that William composed this treatise, full of excerpts of
Cicero and Seneca, to aid his reading of the classical poets and orators.
Modern uncertainty over the authorship of the Moralium has pro-
voked more scholarly articles on William of Conches than has any other
aspect of William's career. While its authorship will probably always
remain in doubt, many scholars at this time consider it the work of
William 62. Nothing in the work conflicts significantly with opinions
William held in other of his works, though on the other hand it shows
little stylistic similarity to William's other writings.
The glosses we presently know were written by William of Conches
differ only in respect to the subject and purpose of the texts glossed.
Three are glosses on philosophical and cosmogonical works - Boethius'
De consolatione philosophie, Macrobius' Commentum in Somnium
Scipionis Ciceronis, and Plato's Timaeus, one a moral, poetic work
-Juvenal's Saturae, and one is a very elaborate grammar - Priscian's
Institutiones. All combine the familiar long, sustained integumental and
philosophical interpretations of myth and idea with the more common-
place glosae on word meanings, etymologies, customs, and the strict
sense of passages .
In his Timaeus gloss William explicitly states his understanding of
the distinction between gloss and commentary: « Although we do not
doubt many have commented on Plato, many glossed, nevertheless
because commentators, neither connecting nor expounding the letter of
the text, alone serve the ideas, and glossators are found in truth
superfluous on light trifles, in truth most obscure on the weighty matters,
we, aroused by the entreaty of friends to whom we owe all noble things,
propose to say something on the abovesaid, cutting off the superfluous
of others, adding the overlooked, clarifying the obscure, removing abusive
things, and imitating the things said well » 63. William intends, then, to

61. Moralium, p. 6.
62. The best summary of scholarship is John R. Williams, «< The Quest for the Author
of the Moralium dogma philosophorum, 1931-1957 », Speculum 32 ( 1957) , 736-49. Silverstein
believes it could well be the work of William: Theodore Silverstein, « The Tertia Philosophia
of Guillaume of Conches », in Quantulacumque, Studies Presented to K. Lake (Baltimore,
1937) . Others argue for Walter of Chatillon: R. A. Gauthier, « Les deux recensions du
Moralium », RMAL (1953), 171-226.
63. Super Platonem, p. 57 : « Etsi multos super Platonem commentatos esse, multos
glosasse non dubitemus , tamen quia commentatores , literam nec continuantes nec exponentes ,
soli sententie serviunt, glosatores vero in levibus superflui, in gravibus vero obscurissmi vel
 OF WILLIAM OF CONCHES 81

use the best of both methods of explication. He also intends to follow

earlier commentators where he thinks they are correct in their interpre-
tations.
The passage just quoted from the Timaeus gloss applies as well to the
other glosses. The method of the Timaeus gloss is in many ways similar
to that of the other glosses. In Edouard Jeauneau's excellent edition of
the glosses on Plato, we find William followed the text of the Timaeus
closely through 53c (the end of the Calcidian translation) but he did not
simply gloss one word after another, with no overall concept of the shape
of his commentary. His expositio librorum duorum Timaei divides the
Timaeus into six little treatises : Book One - 1 ) Recapitulatio of the
Republic, 2) Tractatus de quattuor mundi causis (concerning the four
causes of the world), 3) Tractatus de anima mundi; Book Two - 1)
Tractatus de quatuor generibus animalium (concerning the four classes of
animals), 2) Tractatus de aetatibus hominis et de officio ac utilitate
membrorum (concerning the ages of man and the duty and use of the
limbs), 3) Tractatus de primordiali materia seu hyle (concerning pre-
mordial matter, that is Hyle). While for the most part the argument of
the Timaeus follows this order, William organizes his own work quite
rigidly by treating the sections as tractati, and his expositions unfold
arguments. Yet within the individual treatises William works by close
glossing, using etymology, rhetorical figures, integumental interpretation,
and logic, to break open the sense of the text.
We do not intend to explicate the philosophical positions William
takes in his glosses; it is his method and purpose with which we are
concerned. The method which intermixes the glossator's interest in
definition, etymology, the simple sense, and historical details, with the
commentator's emphasis on the sententia prevails in all of William's
glosses.
While the Plato glosses emphasize interpretation of Platonic meta-
physics and cosmology by integumental and scientific methods, to translate
the somewhat metaphorical cosmogony of Plato into one more concrete,
the Boethius glosses emphasize to a greater extent the integumental,
allegorical interpretation of myths 64. Best known is the extended gloss
on the Orpheus myth, but throughout the gloss are similar extensive
treatments of the myths of Hercules, Polyphemus, Ulysses and others
aluded to the Boethius' Consolatio. The Consolatio glosses, partly because
they are early (the first work we know of by William, perhaps as early as
1118 or 1120) and partly as a result of their subject, emphasize speculative
and moral philosophy rather than the natural philosophy which is
dominant in several of the other glosses. Mlle Hatinguais and Winthrop

nonnulli reperiuntur, rogatu sociorum quibus omnia honesta debemus excitati, super
predictum aliquid dicere proposuimus, aliorum superfla recidentes , pretermissa addentes,
obscura elucidantes, male dicta removentes, bene dicta imitantes >>.
64. Jean-Marie Parent, pp. 124-36. The complete gloss is preserved on a microfilm of
Paris, BN Latin 14380, distributed by the Modern Language Association of America.

6
82 THE WRITINGS

Wetherbee have elaborated the rather complete psychology William

presents in the Boethius glosses 65.
The Macrobius glosses are to this writer for the most part unknown
and we have relied on the account Peter Dronke gives of them in his
work Fabula 66. The glosses, found in two redactions, begin with an
interesting explication of Macrobius' discussion of the appropriateness
of fabulae and somnium to philosophical writings. Dronke emphasizes
William's explication of Macrobius' account of narratio fabulosa because
it comes as close as any authoritative text to a concise theory of myth
signification. William does not, as Dronke claims, differ significantly
from Macrobius' position, but he does agree with Macrobius that some
fables do have true sacred-philosophic significance and are appropriate to
philosophical treatises. The Timaeus is such a treatise, an account in
metaphorical-scientific terms of the ordering of the cosmos, and
William expounds it as fabulous integument partly to have a vehicle for
his Neo-platonic, scientific-Christian theories, and partly because it makes
sense to him in those terms.
For Macrobius the Somnium Scipionis was a fabula which was
appropriate to philosophical writing, and embodied philosophical truth.
Macrobius approved of narrationes fabulosae which were, mainly, morally
appropriate tales of the gods and abstract mythical accounts. The
Somnium Scipionis is a moral exhortation embodied in a dream vision of
the order of the cosmos. Macrobius found it doubly useful because it
was morally appropriate (he defended the use of certain philosophic
fabula) and it provided unending possibilities for explication of Neo-
platonic physics. William glossed Macrobius for much the same reasons:
the work was morally appropriate, philosophically significant, and gave
him a chance to demonstrate and formulate his knowledge of various
branches of philosophy, especially astronomy and physics.
The Juvenal glosses provided William with much different matter
than Macrobius Plato, or Boethius. The satires are fictions of great
poetic power, a power which rests in the effectiveness of their attack and
on their imitative and stylistic skill. William concerned himself, in the
glosses, with both the object and the poetic method of the attack. But
William's methods of interpretation show similarities to those of the
other glosae, and the modes of explanation he employs, mainly moral,
physical, and historical, remind us of passages in the Philosophia and
other of his works. The Juvenal glosses are certainly a unique yet
readily identifiable part of William's opera.

65. J. Hatinguais, « Points de vue sur la volonté et le jugement dans l'œuvre d'un
humaniste Chartrain in L'homme et son destin : Actes du premier congrès international
de philosophie médiévale ( Paris , 1960) ; Winthrop Wetherbee, Platonism and Poetry in the
Twelfth Century (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1972), pp. 81 , 93-97.
66. Dronke, Fabula, pp. 67-75.
 SOURCES AND ASSOCIATES 83

William's Associates, His Age, and Some Classical

and Medieval Writers Who Influenced Him

Though R. L. Poole claimed that he found a « Dominus Wilelmus » in

a twelfth-century Chartres letter book who could well be William of
Conches, we find no record of William's teaching or presence at the
cathedral of Chartres 67. We likewise find no record of William's presence
at the schools in Paris 68. Our knowledge of who were his associates,
then, is a matter of deduction. First, we know from John of Salisbury's
account in the Metalogicon that William was probably a student of
Bernard of Chartres 6. If he studied with Bernard, at Chartres, from
say 1110-1115 (though easily earlier), we can probably conclude William
spent at least several of the following years from 1115 to 1120 studying
with other masters at the schools in Paris. In his De erroribus Gulielmi
de Conchis William of Saint Thierry points out the close similarity
between Abelard's and William of Conches' doctrines of the Trinity 70, and
we might conclude (though it is only a conjecture) that William was one
of the many students who heard Abelard's lectures while the dialectician
held the << chair of Notre Dame » from 1114 to 1118 71. Subsequently
William taught at either one or both of the schools, at Chartres and Paris,
from about 1120 to 1146 or 1147. If a student at Paris, William would
have come into contact with William of Champeaux, Hugh of Saint Victor,
and Abelard or, if not the men, their ideas; at Chartres and later while
teaching he probably came to know Thierry of Chartres, Clarembaud of
Arras, Gilbert of Poitiers, and Herman of Carinthia 72. He, of course,
later came into conflict with William of Saint Thierry and other followers
of Bernard of Clairvaux 73.
William clearly was in contact either as a student or fellow teacher
and scholar, with many of the major twelfth-century thinkers. He also
influenced others with his teachings and writings. Henry II and John of
Salisbury are the most famous of his students, but we see his influence on
Bernardus Silvestris 74, Radulphus de Longo Campo 75, Bartholomeus of
Parma 7, and Nicolas Trivet ”.

67. Poole, pp. 325-326.

68. Ibid. See also Dronke, « New Approaches », p . 123 .
69. Dronke, in « New Approaches », p. 121 , carefully studies the important passages and
concludes, I think correctly, that John of Salisbury implied that William was Bernard of
Chartres' student.
70. William of Saint Thierry, PL 180, 333-34.
71. Etienne Gilson, Heloise et Abelard (Paris, J. Vrin, 1938), p. 38.
72. Poole, pp. 321-340.
73. Dechanet, p. 63.
74. Theodore Silverstein, « The Fabulous Cosmogony of Bernardus Silvestris », Modern
Philology 46 (1948-49), 98, n. 36.
75. Martin Grabmann, « Handschriftliche Forschungen und Mitteilungen zum Schrifttum
des Wilhelm von Conches... », in Sitzungsberichte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissens-
chaften, Phil-Hist . Abt (Munich, 1935) Heft 10.
76. Ibid.
77. Charles Jourdain, Notes et extraits des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque impériale 2
(Paris, 1862), pp. 40-42,
 84 SOURCES AND ASSOCIATES

William sought out and was influenced by translations of Greek,

Arabic, and Hebrew scientific works. Brian Lawn points out that William
was influenced by Adelard of Bath's Quaestiones naturales, which purport
to embody Arabic scientific teachings 78, and apparently in the period
between the Boethius glosses (before 1120) and the Philosophia ( 1125-30)
William became familiar with Salernitan medicine and science: Constan-
tinus Africanus' Pantegni, Johannitius' Isaac ben Honein Ysagoge in Tegni
Galeni, Isaac Israeli, Theophilus' De urinis and De fabrica hominis, and
Alfanus of Salerno's translation of the Premnon physicon by Nemisius of
Emessa 79. Lawn also argues that William was familiar with the « Saler-
nitan quaestiones » 80. Haskins notes that in the 1130's and 1140's Chartres'
library possessed, besides Adelard's Quaestiones naturales, his translation
of the Khorasmian astronomical tables, a translation of an Arabic astro-
logical treatise, and Herman of Carinthia's translation of Ptolemy's
Planisphere 81. Thus, both Toledan and Salernitan sources were providing
William medical, physical, and astronomical modes of explanation alter-
native to those he found in Plato's Timaeus and the commentary of
Calcidius, Macrobius' Commentum, Martianus Capella, Seneca's Naturales
quaestiones, Pliny's Natural History, Firmicus Maternus' Mathesis, and
Ptolemy's Canons 82.
For the spectrum of classical writers with which the Chartrians, and
William, were familiar we can rely on three main sources : Holmberg's
edition of the Moralium dogma philosophorum, in which we find the
range of Latin moral philosophers and poets available to William: Cicero,
Virgil, Seneca, Horace, Sallust, Publilius Syrus, Juvenal, Terence, Boethius,
Macrobius, Lucan, Persius, Ovid, Maximianus, in fact most of the Latin
writers we now know; and Thierry of Chartres' Heptateuchon 8 and
John of Salisbury's Metalogicon. Greek philosophy, on the other hand,
was more indirectly that directly known. By 1150 Plato's Timaeus, in
the Latin translation of Calcidius, was the only dialogue easily available,
although the Phaedo and Meno were translated around mid-century 84,
but Apuleius' De Platone et eius dogmate (itself heavily dependent on the
Timaeus), Macrobius' works, Augustine, and Boethius' Consolatio
preserved many of Plato's assumptions and positions in abbreviated
form 85. John of Salisbury's Metalogicon gives ample evidence of the
widespread use of the Organon of Aristotle, especially the Categoriae, De
interpretatione, and the Priora analytica, by the mid-twelfth century, but

78. Brian Lawn, The Salernitan Questions (Oxford , Oxford University Press, 1963) , p. 51.
79. See Dronke, « New Approaches », pp. 123-25.
80. Lawn, pp. 50-55.
81. Charles H. Haskins, Studies in the History of Medieval Science (Cambridge, Mass .,
Harvard University Press, 1927) , pp. 90-93.
82. Clerval, pp. 221-224.
83. Clerval, p . 221.
84. Haskins, pp. 88 , 168-69.
85. Concerning Apuleius, see Theodore Silverstein , review of Tullio Gregory's Anima
Mundi in Speculum 33 ( 1958 ) , 713-14 ; Raymond Klibansky, The Continuity of the Platonic
Tradition in the Middle Ages (London, Warburg Institute, 1939) discusses the indirect tradition.
T
 OF WILLIAM OF CONCHES 85

the remainder of Aristotle's writings did not come into Latin scholarship
extensively until the late twelfth and early thirteenth century.
Such lists are of some use to us because they show us the resources,
the tradition and its limits, with which William of Conches and his
associates worked. The main philosophical positions of Greek and
Roman philosophy, and a great deal of the philosophical knowledge of
the ancients were available to twelfth-century scholars and intellectuals,
but in the case of Greek philosophy and science came to them only
rarely in the context of the original works. Because the context and
whole of the classical argument was missing, twelfth-century man had to
provide through his own ingenuity a whole context. We must keep in
mind, also, that much of what he had to work with had already been
reshaped by fifth- and sixth-century writers, and much came to him in
epitomes or florilegia. Twelfth-century Christians composed explanations
of the phenomena of the world and of the dynamics of life which, for
the most part, were both by design and accident limited . They received
a somewhat fragmentary classical heritage and used it to construct
systems admittedly quite different from the ancient systems; they never
intended, it would seem, to reconstruct those old systems from the
fragments which they had. But Western thinkers, and especially Char-
trian intellectuals, later sought out the Platonic dialogue, and Aristotle's
natural philosophy, for the methods, and knowledge, and powers of
explanation they would provide.
In general , William of Conches embraced a cosmology drawn from
Plato's Timaeus, but whereas for Plato it was never really more than a
metaphorical meditation, William (as we see happening in the Philosophia
and more so in his glosses on that dialogue), transmuted that concept of
the ordering of the world by naturalistic explanation on the microscopic
and perceived level, and by the daring explanation provided by the
certain realities of Christian faith and revelation on the imperceptable
macroscopic level, into something actually true. With the power of
dialectic, that Abelardian delight, combined with Salernitan physiology,
Arabic astronomy, and classical science, William constructed what was
for him a real explanation of the cosmos 8 .
We can understand, then, the tremendous excitement with which
Aristotle's scientific treatises were received, for they provided further,
workable, modes of naturalistic explanation and methods of analysis.
But William, who died perhaps in 1155, never was to encounter them.
Chartrian humanism and William of Conches played a very small
part in the development of philosophy; Gilson devotes just a few pages
to the school of Chartres, and relegates William to a long footnote, in his
History of Christian Philosophy in the Middle Ages 87. William's works
were, however, quite popular and widely disseminated : Vernet has

86. See Brian Stock, Myth and Science in the Twelfth Century (Princeton, Princeton
University Press, 1972), p. 8 and many subsequent pages for this general concept of Chartrian
use of myth .
87. Gilson, pp. 140-152,
86 SOURCES AND ASSOCIATES

listed over forty manuscripts of the Philosophia, and there are probably
at least as many of the Dragmaticon 88. But other strains of twelfth-
century philosophy were more productive of later development, especially
Abelard's nominalism and dialectic, the mysticism of Saint Bernard and
the Victorines and more than any, the translations of Aristotle and of
Arabic philosophy and science. William apparently was willing to forego
the possibilities and disorder inherent in embracing a « new mental
universe » 89, for the coherence of the old Platonist order within which
could be placed the still very fragmentary evidence from Salerno and
Toledo. In part his choice was the result of his historical moment and
place- the 1120's and 1130's at Chartres - and in part the result of his
role of teacher and systematizer. Within these limits he created, with
logical and scientific care, a most impressive and satisfying body of
critical and philosophical writings.

88. Vernet, « Un remaniement », pp. 252-55.

89. Gilson, p. 237.
 PART TWO

WILELMI DE CONCHIS GLOSAE

IN IUVENALIS SATIRAS
1

1
 < WILELMI DE CONCHIS GLOSAE
IN IUVENALIS SATIRAS INCIPIUNT >
< ACCESSUS AB AUCTORE INCERTO >

Unde et qualiter et qua utilitate et causa agat iste auctor et cui si

alicui philosophie parti suponatur et quis titulus primo nobis conside-
randum est. Agit igitur de Romanorum viciis, ex quo et ipsa eius materia
esse dinoscitur, quia unde aliquis agit, id eius materia est. Agit ergo
hoc modo reprehendenda ipsa vicia, hac utilitate ut auditorem retrahat
a viciis. Causa vero compositionis huius operis talis est : Iuvenalis iste
natus de Aquinate opido, tempore Neronis Romam venit, vidensque Paridem
panthomimum ita familiarem imperatori¹ ut nihil unquam nisi eius nutu
ageret, ex indignatione prorupit in hos versus :
Quod non dant proceres, dabit histrio ; tu Cameninos a
Tub Bareas, tu nobilium magna astria curas ² ?

Tandem ut eos sufficientius reprehenderet, ad satiram scribendam se

transtulit, nec in Neronem et Paridem tantum, sed in alios viciose agentes
reprehensio eius redundavit. Nero vero comperto, quod in eum Iuvenalis
dixerat, non est ausus aperte eum exilio damnare, sed prefectum cuidam
exercitui misit eum in Egiptum, pre ea exercitum sed sine ipso redire
iussit. Et ita in Egipto exul mortuus est.
Sunt qui querendum existiment et in hoc et in aliis auctoribus cui
parti philosophie subponantur. Magister vero Bernardus 3 dicebat hoc non
esse in auctoribus querendum cum ipsi nec partes philosophie nec de
philosophia tractant. Magister Wilelmus de Conchis dicit auctores d omnes,
quamvis nec partes sint philosophie nec de ipsa agant, philosophie suponi
propter quam tractant, et omnes illi parti philosophie suponi, propter

1. Cf. Suetonius, De vita Caesarum 6. 54 and 7 (Dom). 3.

2. Iuv. 7. 90-91.
3. Bernardus: some argument has occurred over the identity of Bernard. The use of
imperfect for Bernard and present for William suggests that Bernard was dead at the time
of writing. Since Bernard Silvester was alive in the 1140's, the reference most likely is to
Bernard of Chartres.
a. Comerinos Iuv.
b. tu (ante Bareas), P., et, Iuv.
c. actoribus, P.
d. actores, P.
90 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

quam tractant. Utraque ergo lectio vera est ; auctores suponuntur philo-
sophie id est propter ethicam, que pars est philosophie, tractant, ut
scilicet moralem comparent instructionem, et auctores e non suponuntur
philosophie, id est non sunt partes eius. His executis de titulo videamus.
Titulus talis est : Decii Iunii Sillani Iuvenalis satirarum liber incipit.
Decius dictus est vel quia decimo mense vel quia decimus post alios
natus est ; Iunior quia iunior fratrum suorum erat ; Sillanus quia de
genere Sille vel quasi silvanus quia alicuius iuxta silvas habitantis fuit
filius ; Iuvenalis proprium nomen persone.
Quid sit satira et unde sit dicta videamus. Satira igitur est reprehensio f
metrice composita, et distat inter satiram et invectionem, satira enim
metrice sed invectio prosaice scripta est reprehensio . Palinodia vero est
reprehensionis recantacio ut si aliquem prius reprehendas, postea eum
laudas ; pertinet tamen ad reprehensionem. Satira secundum quosdam 4
dicitur a satiris diis nemorum eo quod in proprietatibus omnibus pares
conveniant. Satiri enim nudi sunt et dicaces ; saltando incedunt. Immi-
tantur gestus hominum ; caprinos habent pedes.
Nec tamen habet veritas deos aliquos esse huius modi, sed in rei
veritate sunt quedam animalia in silvis habita< n > tiah, que, quia saltando
incedunt et cum in uno loco videantur statim ibidem non videntur, stulta
antiquitas pro diis venerata est. Satirorum ergo proprietates habet satira :
illi nudi et hec nuda, sunt enim quidam < qui > i reprehensiones suas
velant, ut Lucanus de pinguedine Neronis ait : Sentiet axis honus et tunc
obliquo sidere Romam 5. Satira vera nude et aperte reprehendit. Dicaces
sunt satiri. Satira nihil tacet et nullik parcit ; illi saltando incedunt, hec
modo, unde statim alium tangit ; hec quemadmodum et illi gestus homi-
num imitatur, quam turpiter enim agunt homines, tam turpiter hec
reprehendit. Caper vero fedidum est animal, unde satira propter vicio-
rum fecorem similis est satiris caprinos pedes habentibus.
6
Secundum autem quosdam a lance quadam que in templis deorum
habebatur dicta est satira. Mos erat apud antiquos ut cum diis sacri-
ficabatur post sacrificia non remanerent in templo alique sacrificiorum
reliquie. Nefas etiam apud illos iudicatur sacrificiorum reliquias manu
contingere, preparaverant etiam quoddam vas quod in ingressu templi
quando sacrificabatur ponebant. Et ita ordinaverant quod in vase illo
reliquie sacrorum defluebant. Vas vero illud ad modum Galee factum erat,
sed huius modi vas si non sustentaretur. cito in latus caderet. Cum ergo
sacrificaretur vas positum sustentabant quoadusque omnes sacrificiorum

4. Diomedes, De arte grammatica, in Grammatici Latini, ed . Heinrich Keil (Lipsiae;

Teubner, 1850-1880), 1 : 485-86.
5. Lucanus, Bellum civile 1. 510.
6. Diomedes, (ibid., p . 486) , Varro, De lingua latina 5. 119, Servius, Ad Aeneidem 2. 399.
e. actores, P.
f. reprehnsio, P.
g. reprehnsio, P.
h. habitatia, P.
i. quae, P.
k. tacet (post nulli) exp. P (ut vid.).
 ACCESSUS 91

reliquie in ipsum defluxissent. Post hec definiebant illud sustentare ; vas

vero cito cadebat in latus, et ita reliquie extra templum fundebantur. Unde
vas illud ab effusione futis dicebatur ; ab illo etiam vase futiles dicuntur
qui nihil retinent, sed quecumque sciunt dicunt. Vas quoque illud alio
nomine satira dicebatur7, a saturitate reliquiarum, a quo satira dicta est,
u conversa in i quia quodam modo satura est plena viciis, que ipsa
reprehendit. Habet et in hoc similitudinem cum predicto vase quod
quemadmodum vas illud omnia fundit ita et nihil tacet.
Potest et satira dici a satiris, id est ab agrestibus dicta est. Legitur
namque in Macrobio de Saturnalibus quod receptis frugibus et iterum
terre commendatis, agrestes cuiuscumque patrie conveniebant in honore
Cereris et Bachi. Parata hostia post ibant sacerdotes trahentes eam in
circuitu circa fines agrorum, et pleps sequebatur eos invocans Cererem
et Bachum. Et festa huiusmodi arvambalia⁹ vocabant ab arvis et ambio ;
finitis vero precibus communicabantur hostia<m > . Deinde sibi indulgendo,
commedendo, et bibendo magnam partem diei consumebant. Ad ultimum,
rustici unius ville contra rusticos alterius ville consurgebant et in vicem
fundeba <n>t convicia¹ non bene consona pro discretione rusticana. Et
huius modi convicia predicta sunt satire, id est agrestes callidiores autem in
artem redigerunt et metrice ceperunt reprehendere. Retinet tamen anti-
quum nomen huius modi reprehensio metrica, et hac de causa huius
nominis satira secundum diverso auctores scripta invenitur > m.

7. Cf. Isidorus, Etimologiarum 5.

8. Cf. T. Livius, Ab urbe condita 7. 2. Virgilius, Georgicae 2. 385. Horatius, Epistolae 2.
1. 139. Macrobius , Saturnalia 3. 5 7. Servius, Ad Virgilii Eclogas 3. 77.
9. ambarvalia, Macrobius, Saturnalia, 3.5.7.
1. fundebat, P.; convincia, P.
m. inveniuntur, P.
 < GLOSAE IN IUVENALIS SATIRAM PRIMAM >
< Baltimore. Walters Art Gallery
20 >.
Semper ego etc in ista prima satyra
agit Iuvenalis duo ; in principio
reprehendit poetas inutiliter scri-
bentes, deinde ostendit quare plus
hoc genus carminis scribat quam
aliud. Sed ut ostendat nemini se
parcere reprehendit se ipsum de
nimia taciturnitate quia qui sibi non
parcit mihi vel tibi quomodo par-
eorum que vitiose scripta cotidie
cet ? Dicit ergo ego auditor tantum
recitantur. Auditor tantum est qui
numquam respondit
et numquam reponam : id est num-
quam vicem reddam in reprehen-
denda garulos illos et nota quod
nimis mordaciter dixit reponam ,
reponere enim proprie parturien-
tium est. Ostendit igitur per hoc
verbum se concepisse quod contra
istos nihil possit parcere, deinde
subiungit iustam causam esse repo-
nendi quia sepe vexatus est illorum
garulitate. et << Ego » Ergo inquit
< Paris. Bibliothèque Nationale
Latin 2904 >10.
In hac prima satira duo facit, prius
enim reprehendit poetas inutiliter
scribentes ut licencius alios repre-
hendat, qui non eis qui sue profes-
sionis sunt parcit. Demum ostendit
quare potius satiram scribat quam
aliud genus carminis, unde et hec
satira quasi quidam est prologus
operis. Sed ut liberius consortes
suos reprehendat, seipsum in prin-
cipio de nimia taciturnitate repre-
hendit. Et ita se nulli in hoc opere
parcere insinuat, quia qui sibi non
parcit mihi vel tibi quomodo par-
cet ? et ita more satirico ex indi-
gnatione clamando incipit
Semper ego nota quod esse < audi-
tor > n non est vicium sed esse
semper tantum. Nota et illud quod
interrogative possunt legi isti duo
versus ita numquam reponam ne
id est an Theseide Theseis a Theseo,
sicut Eneis ab Eneo. Nomen est
fabule. † Eroi to ego illud non
mutatur numquamne id est certe et
quod vere pro certe inveniatur.
» aliter
Dicit Plato « ne ego etc >
10. p. 221. P.
n. auditorem, P.
o. † Eroi †, lectio incerta,
 IN SATIRAM 1.1-3
vexatus bene ; post reponam ponit
vexatus. Solent agasones equas in
tempore partus vexare ut apert-
< is > a poris ex calore facilius
pariant ; per hoc igitur quando dicit
vexatus ostendit se paratum esse
ad reprehendendum ¹ . Sed ne puta-
verit aliquis quod honesta re esset
vexatus, subiungit quo sit vexatus,
scilicet Theseide rauci.
impune etc hunc versum legit qui-
dam interrogando nisi primum
quam concludendo. Interrogando
sic :
ergo recitaverit mihi impune toga-
tas ac si diceret « non >> togate
sunt commedie que a togato id est a
plebe emebantur. In toga recita-
bantur. Elegi sunt versus qui per
exametrum et pentametrum compo-
siti ; dicti elegi quia ad miseriam
describendam sunt inventi , elegia
enim miseria est dicta ab eleyson
que est miserere
1. Bernardus Silvestris, Commentum. ( Ed .
Riedel), p. 9, 1. 6 ; Virgilius, Georg. 3. 132.
a. apertum, W.
b. impune, cf. P semper ego.
c. nomen (?) pro non. W.
93
potest legi reponam quia reponere
proprium est parturiencium num-
quam id est non parturiam quasi
diceret « ego iam concepi in ani-
mo », et secundum hoc bene sequi-
tur vexatus quia mos erat agaso-
num ante partum equas vexare ut,
ex calore aperirentur pori, facilius
parerent
impune ergo quasi diceret « ego
non reponam » et quandoquidem
ego non re<ponam > ergo quilibet
potuit dicere quod voluerit, et hoc
habes equipollentum , sic
ergo etc togatas notandum quod
comedia quandoque nomen recipit
ab habitu recitantis 11, ut planipedia
que planis id est nudis pedibus reci-
tabatur 12, quandoque a suis emto-
ribus, emebantur enim comedie que-
dam a nobilibus, quedam a populo.
Pretexta ergo erat quoddam genus
vestis quo utebantur nobiles a qua
veste pretextate dicebantur come-
die 13, que a nobilibus remunera-
bantur. Toga vero genus erat vestis
ad modum Colobii latas habens
manicas, et hoc genere vestis ute-
bantur milites in bello ut paratiores
essent ad pugnandum. Pleps vero
eodem genere vestis in pace indue-
batur. Unde et comedie a populo
remunerate togate nuncupabantur
ab illa scilicet veste. ille recitaverit
mihi id est me sciente
elegos eleison est miserere unde
elegia, enim miseria quia miseri
miseremur unde proprie elegi di-
cuntur versus exametri et penta-
11. Cf. Scholia in Iuvenalem vetustiora,
ed. Paulus Wessner (Lipsiae, Teubner, 1931) ,
p. 2.
12. Cf. Macrobius, Saturnalia 1. 6.
13. Cf. Isidorus 1. 36. 14.
94 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
scriptus et in tergo id est in
† ... parte ... libri id est ex
parte pili. Antiqui enim tamen
modo ex parte carnis solebant
scribere et necdum finitus notat
igitur operis superfluitatem et scrip-
torum ; in primam quid longam
... breviter non comprehendit a
ts ... t ; enim poete brevia dilatare,
longa breviare est. Igitur summa
recitabant viles poete hec licebat
superflua sine pena non quod
reprehendam eos ; sed interroga-
tione aliter littera continuatur, sed
non summa littera mutatur sic si
non reprehendam. Poete ergo im-
pune recitabant mihi hec superflua
et inutilia quia aliam vindictam non
habent. In hoc notat poetarum et
negligentiam censorum qui super-
flua debebant corrigere scilicet
Tesiede rauci Codri Theseus et
Piritous unum par amicitie 2 fuerunt
qui disposuerunt se non ducturos
uxores, nisi de filiabus Iovis. Cum
igitur Theseus Helenam sibi rapuis-
set, nullam de filiabus Iovis ad opus
2. Cf. Mythographus 2. 133, in Scriptores
rerum mythicarum latine tres, ed. G. H.
Bode (Cellis, Schultz, 1834) .
d. qui, lectio incerta.
metri de miseria facti 14. Sepius
tamen solemus nominare elegos
versus factos de amore quia materia
est in amore miseria. togatas
comedias illas. Inpune quando
scilicet faciam penas, reprehensus
et correptus a me. hic alius elegos
id est versus factos de miseria
scriptus in margine margine dico
iam plena mos erat antiquorum
scribere tantum modo ex parte
carnis et relinquere marginem
vacuum pro longitudine pollicis.
Reprehendit ergo poetam illum qui
de Horeste scripserat de prolixitate
nimia quia marginem implerat et
in tergo scripserat, quorum utrum-
que vicium erat, et ut apertius
reprehendat dicit quod necdum
finierat. Nota apud antiquos et
hic margo et hec margo dice-
batur 15 ; et nota ergo pro « an. » P
posse legi in his quattuor versibus,
vel etiam expletere a impune mihi
< etc > id est fabula de Theseo
Theleso ; per hoc quod dicit ingens,
notat garrulitatem poete, qui multa
aposuerat verba. Per hoc quod
dicit consumpto die notat scriptum
inutile. Per hoc quod dicit « im-
pune >» notat et ipsos prelatos repre-
hensibiles esse qui inutiliter scri-
bentes non corrigebant.
Codri Codrus fuit quidam vilis
poeta qui scripsit fabulam 16 de
Theseo. Antiquitus autem boni poete
vocabantur olores et viles poetes
anseres, unde Virgilio argutos
videor inter strepere anser olores 17.
14. Isidorus 1. 36. 14.
15. Scholia, p. 3.
16. Scholia, p . 2.
17. Virgilius, Ecloga 9. 35-36.
p. an (?) ut vid.
q. expletere, means explere (?).
 IN SATIRAM 1.3-6 95

Piritoi socii in terram reper- Ut ergo eum Codrus notet vilem

< iret > † . Cum eodem, ut Proser- poetam ; vocat eum < raucum > r
pinam raperet, ad inferos descendit ad modum anseris, vel de garru-
quo agnito inferi Piritoum quia litate eum notat quia propter assi-
tantum erat homo retinuerunt, sed duam declamationem, raucus effec-
Theseo quia erat semideus licentiam tus fuerat. Aliter etiam possunt legi
redeundi concesserunt ; quia nolens isti duo versus ut dicatur
sine socio reverti ibi remansit.
Hanc fabulam Codrus vilis poeta
descripsit et a digniori persona que
est Theseus Theseide librum suum
notavit, quem importune recitando
Iuvenalem multociens vexabat. In
hoc qui³ vocat eum vilem notat
fuisse penit<u >me, mali enim
poete anseres vocabantur et boni
a dulcedine cantus olores, unde
hoc respondetur : viderer mihi
argutos interrogare anser olores 4;
et consumpserit margine digni libri Telephus nomen est fabule. Tele-
id est ingens fabula de Thelepho, phus rex fuit Nusorum de quo
legitur 18 : quod vulneratus ab
ac si diceret : enim Telephus fuit
rex Nusorum qui, accepto vulnere Achille, accepit responsum se non
ab Achille, responsum accepit se posse sanari nisi item ab eodem et
non posse sanari, nisi ab eodem in hasta eadem et eodem loco vulnus
eodem loco vulneraretur, quando acciperet ; in habitu ergo exulis ab
veniens ad Achillem hic imperator Achille hoc impetravit
est sanatus. Inde historia scripta
est que a Thelepho Thelephus
vocatus est. Consumpserit mihi
diem impune. Horestes id est
fabula de Horeste

Horestes 19 id est fabula de Horeste. Horestes similiter nomen est fabule.

Legitur in fabulis quod dum Menelaus et Agamemnon properarent ad
obsidionem Troie, morati diu in Aulide insula utpote non habentes
ventum prosperum, autem < responsum > s acceperunt se ventum pros-
perum non habere posse si non sacrificaretur regius sanguis. Habebat
Agamemnon filium quemdam de Clitemestra uxore sua Horestem , scilicet

3. W-1 scribe often uses the qui abbre- 18. Cf. Hyginus, Fabula 101.
viation to indicate quod or quis.
r. anucus, P.
4. Virgilius, Ecloga 9. 35-36.
e. penitam, P- pennatum (?) .

19. et seq. ms. P solum.

s. responsis, P.
96 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

et filiam que vocabatur Effigenia. Decretum est ergo ut Effi<genia>

sacrificaretur. Malebat ergo filiam sacrificari quam iter fratris sui
Mene <lai >, et suum impediret. Cum ergo sacrificari deberet
Effi<genia >; aposita cerva tulit eam, innupta Minerva et rapuit eam in
Tauricam regionem, et ibi prefecit eam in quodam templo quod ei
dicatum erat. Habueruntque Menelaus et Agamemnon > ventum
prosperum et provenientes ad Troiam obsederunt eam. Dum ergo esset
Agamemnon in obsidione, adamavit Clitem<nes >trat, uxor sua, Egistum,
et pro decem annos quibus moratus est Agamemnon habuit liber<os>
tunc cum ea Egistus . Reversoque Agamemnone >, vidit Clite <nestram >
quod non posset libere ad eam ingredi, Egisthus paravit ingredi quamdam
camisiam sine exitu. Et quadam die exeunte Agamemnone de balneo
dedit ei camisiam illam, sed cum laboraret efferre caput Clite<mnestra>
eum securi interfecit. Sciens ergo Horestes, qui et, qua de causa mater
fecerat, eam occidit et pro homicidio et pro adulterio, quod patraverat.
Inde cepit exagitari furiis et comitatus Pilade socio suo pervenit in
Tauricam regionem. In templo in quo Minerva prefecerat sororem suam,
erat autem consuetudo ut si duo homines simul in templum illud veni-
rent, alter sacrificaretur. Cum ergo hoc ab Effi <genia > didicisent,
uterque obtulit se ad sacrificandum tantum enim sese diligebant, quod
alter pro altero mori non dubitabat. Mota pietate, Effige <nia > dixit quod
illa die neuter eorum occideretur. Sed in crastino < iunxit > w eos
redire, scriptis nominibus, et tunc quam vellent sacrificaret; in crastino
redierunt. Sic Effi<genia > vere lecto nomine. nomine Horestis. Scivit
eum esse fratrum suum, et cum ipso rediit in regionem suam furata
palladium, et ferens secum illud in fasciculis. Unde legis pallada
fascilidem 20 dici quia in fascibus tulit eam Effigen<iam > de Taurica
regione. Dicit itaque auctor :

nota mihi etc Antipophoram 5 nota magis 21 quia de se bene sen-

facit ad hoc quod aliquis posset
dicere << unde hec fiducia qua
poetas reprehendis ? » Reprehen-
d<am > f quia nutritus sum in
studio et in † <conv > entu † & sapi-
entum ,
tire debet qui alios reprehendit.
Iccirco Iuvenalis ostendit se talem
esse qui et possit et debeat alios
reprehendere, commendans se in
logica et physica et poetica.

20. pallada fascilidem, Guillaume here is probably quoting from a classical source,
unknown to the author.
t. Clitemetra, P.
v. liberum, P.
w. iuxit, P.

5. « Antipophora... est responsio tacite 21. et seq. utraque mss. W et P testi-

questioni ». London , BM Royal 15 B XVIII , ficantur.
fol. 1 v.
f. reprehendit, P.
g. <conv>entu †, ink splotch.
 IN SATIRAM 1.6-7
et ideo viles poetas possum repre-
hendere, quia nulli illorum est
magis nota sua domus in qua
luxuriam suam frequentant quam
mihi est not us h
lucus Martis lucus Martis erat
< Athenis > i dictus Ariopagus ut
virtus ville. Ares enim est virtus,
pagos villa dictus, sic ibi erat turris
et habitatio senatus et sapientum.
Ibi conveniebant sapientes et de
philosoph<i >ak et logica confe-
rentes bonas sententias. Scripta
bona dabant, mala dampnabant per
cognitionem ¹ ; igitur huius loci
notat se philosophum et logicum, et
sic malos poetas secure posse
reprehendere. Et nulli est magis
sua nota domus quam mihi est
h. nota, W.
i. Athen, Cod.
k. philosophca, W.
1. congnitionem, W.
97
Primum ergo commendat se in
logica, per hoc quod dicit se
cognosse lucum Martis. Tres vici
leguntur fuisse Athenis, quorum
unus dicebatur Hermes pagus, id
est villa Mercurii 22. Hermes enim
interpres, pagus villa, sed Mercurius
interpres erat deorum, vicus ille
prius mercatorum erat, quia Mer-
curius deus illorum est 23. Unde et
Mercurius dicitur quasi mercator
kirios id est deus. Alius vicus
dicebatur A<ri >o pagus, id est villa
virtutis, Ares enim est virtus, dice-
batur et alio nomine lucus Martis.
Ille vicus prius erat militum. Ter-
cius vicus dicebatur Cronopagus, id
est villa satura, croun enim est
tempus, saturus aut est instrumen-
tum quo certum spacium temporis
metitur. In hoc vico habitabant
agri cultores, quia agricolarum
labores pro temporibus compescan-
tur, si enim bonum est tempus bene,
si aut malum male. Conveniebant
enim sapientes in Onopago, quem
nos alio nomine diximus lucus
Martis, et ibi de logica disputabant,
per hoc quod dicit innuit se esse
de numero illorum. Dicit ergo sua
domus in qua homo agit immundi-
cias suas nota est et cetera vel sua
do<mus > id est conscientia 24, quia
quemadmodum in domo sanus
quiescit, eger laborat, ita et in
conscientia ; sanum in conscientia
quiescere ostendit scriptura : gloria
hec est testimonium conscientie 25 ;
et poeta nemo nocens se, iudice
absoluitur.
22. Isidorus 8. 9. 45-53.
23. Cf. Fulgentius, Mythologiae 1. 18 , in
Opera, ed. Rudolph Helm (Lipsiae, Tuebner,
1898).
24. Guillaume de Conches, Glosae in Boe-
tium (BN Latin 14380 fol. 69 r).
25. II Cor. 1 : 12.
7
98 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
Antrum Vulcani id est Ethna que
dicitur antrum a concavitate Vul-
cani, quia ibi est perpetuus ignis.
Ignis enim dicitur vulcanus quasi
volicanus quia volat in altum et est
canus in favillis 6. Antrum id est
quam mihi nota est enim Ethna aut
regionem Eoliani ; dicit hoc antrum
esse sibi notum non quod forsitan
illud umquam vidisset, sed quia
physicam faciebat, unde perpetuus
ibi ignis erat et in hoc notat se
physicum. Physica vero talis est :
Mons iste cavernosus et huius
habens intus sulphureos lapides
parte, igitur ictis m intrante et ex
altera exeunte fit conflictus, unde
ignis ex motu creatur, qui mixtus
sulphureis lapidibus perpetuum
facit incendium. Et etiam notum
est mihi
Quid agant venti tonitrua, < corrus-
cationes > n et fulmina scilicet.
6. Isidorus 8. 11. 39.
m. ictis, ut vid.
n. choricationes, W.
Antrum Vulcani In Sicilia iuxta
Etholiam regionem mons est qui-
dam qui Etna dicitur in quo est
perpetuus ignis 26. Unde et antrum
Vulcani dicitur. Vulcanus enim
quasi volitans candor ignis dicitur,
vel quasi volicanus quia ad alta
volat et canus est in favillis. Hinc
illud est quod « claudus » legitur
quia per anfractum incedit et quod
baculo, ne cadat innititur, quia
lignea materia ut non deficiat sus-
tinetur. Huic etiam congruit, quod
faber dicitur, quia in ea metalla
liquefiunt vel emoliuntur, quod
mulcifer dicitur quasi mulcens fer-
rum et mulciber quasi mulcens
imbrem, quia eo < tepeficiunt > *
aquam . Dicit ergo auctor notum
esse sibi antrum Vulcani. Per hoc
dat intelligere se bene scire unde
contingat quod in Etholia est ignis
perpetuus, et ita se commendat in
physica. Unde ergo ille ignis per-
petuus contingat videamus : hoc
non est aliud nisi quod terra illa
cavernosa est, et habet lapides sul-
fureos. Subintrat ergo aer exterior
et interior pugnat exire, et ita fit
ibi quidam conflictus ex quo rarefit
aer. Rarefactus transit in proxi-
mum sibi elementum, id est in
ignem, et admisceret se sulfureis
lapidibus et incedit illos sulfuris.
Vero natura est quod s< e > mel y
incensus non cito extinguitur, et in
non est ibi ignis perpetuus.
Quid agant venti in illo scilicet
antro 27, quia perpetuu<m> z ignem
26. Cornutus, Glosae, BM Royal A
XVIII, fol. 2v.
27. Cf. Seneca, Quaestiones naturales,
Bk. 2.
x. tepeficuit, P.
y. simel, P.
z. perpetuunt, P.
 IN SATIRAM 1.8-9 99

Quomodo venti agant ista et quare
plus in uno tempore anni quam in
alio, si quis scire desiderat nostram
physicam scilicet < adeat > ; quis °
auctor fuit sciendum auctorum ? P
Poete fabulas veris admiscent.
Subiungit se scire fabulas aucto-
rumq ; hoc est mihi notum .
ibi faciunt, vel sit capulum per se.
Et per hoc notet se iterum valere in
physica, innuens se scire quid agant
venti et fulgura et corru <s >ca-
tiones a et tonitrua. Tum enim ven-
tus nihil aliud sit quam aer com-
motus, contingit quandoque sibi
occurare particulas aeris, fitque fra-
gor tonitrui.

Aer 28 vero calefactus in ignem se transit et fit coruscatio que, quamvis

cum fragose fiat, citius tamen ad nos pervenit quia visus velocius est
auditu. In predicto partium aeris occursu generatur quidam occursus ,
impetus quo sursum accendente sine fulmine est fragor. Deorsum autem
tendente, si tantus < impetus > non sit quod ad obstaculum perveniat,
adhuc non est fulmen; perveniens autem ad obstaculum obstancia findit,
et tunc est fulmen. Sed quia proprius aeris motus est sursum tendere,
nulla ver<r >ante revertitur , ut ait Lucanus : < Sparsos > d ignes
recolligit 29. Multo autem humore in hac superiore parte existente, aer
existens in impetu generato non potest igniri. Fitque fulmen findens et
non urens, quod si ibi non sit humor, aer existens in impetu et commotu
ignescit, fitque fulmen urens. Quidam tamen asserunt fulmen esse
lapideam substanciam, et est istorum sententia quod fumo humido
ascendente ad superiora, elevatur causa illa aliquid terrene substantie.
Et ex solis calore spissatur, in lapidem continetur quoque in concavitate
nubis donec impetus aliquis nubem dividi faciat, et inde lapis ille expulsus
cadit et alta percutit 30.

quas umbras etc suo iudicio.
Sunt enim secundum fabulas tres
filii Iovis iudices animarum in
inferis, id est Eacus, Minos, Rade-
mantus. Licet torquent malorum
animas, bonorum absolvunt, et
etiam notus est mihi unde
quas torqueat umbras Tres sunt
iudices apud inferos, filii Iovis :
Eacus, Minos, et Radamantus ; dicit
ergo se scire quas umbras tor-
<queat > Eacus apud inferos. Sed
hoc fabulosum est quia itaque
poetarum est fingere, et de fabulis

o. correpta ; antehac quis actor iste a. corrucationes, P.

poete est ».
p. actor, W ; actorum, W ; sciendum, ut
vid.
q. actorum, W.

28. ms. P solum.

29. Lucanus, Bellum civile, 1. 157.
30. Guillaume de Conches , De philosophia mundi, 3. 10 (PL 172 , 1-170) . Mss. P et W
iterum .
b. occursus, occursus, P ; (deest Iuv.).
c. verante, P.
d. Persos, pro Sparsos, P.
100 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

scribere. Dicens se fabulas nosse

commendat se in poetica.

alius id est Iason qui alius est ab Unde alius Legitur de Iasone quod
Eaco devehat furtive auream pellem a Colco insula detulit vellus aureum
furto. Haec est fabula : Frixus et furto Medee, per quod se valere in
Helle filii Ath<amantis >7, a poetica non tacet.
noverca ergo pa<terna > accusati 8,
sunt exilio dampnati, qui cum ad
mare pervenissent in navem, qui
transiret, li ... ntr Martem . † De
cum erant † Ss progenie Aiete Thebani
et progenie Hermiones filii ; Martem
et Veneris < sic > invocaverant
qui † ... † arietem. Aureum vellus eis
misit quo ascenso dum trans-
f<r>etarent < mare > Helle im-
minet Colcore † ... † in mare cecidit.
Frixus, vero, evasus in Colcere
insula, vellus arietum † ... † Icarrum .
Aries vere translatus in celum fuit
et insignum formatus, ad ad hoc
vellud rapiendum , missus est
t ... apellia suo patruo, et auxilio
Medee furto illud devexit et etiam
notum est mihi 9

Quantas iaculetur ornus ; id est Quantas iaculetur etc Monicus no-

Hercules, dictus Monicus a singu-
laritate unguis , quem magnum
habet in altero pollice. Monos
enim est unus. Vel Monicus dicitur
Poliphemus qui unicum habuit
oculum qui ornos post Ulixem et
ovis series iaculabatur. Sed quid
significat Poliphemus quid Ulixes in
nostris glosulis super Boetium
inveniet qui hoc scire voluerit 10.
men est Herculis a quantitate
humane ungule. Onon est enim
unguis qui iaculatus est ornos in
nuptiis Peritoi, quod iste dicit se
nosse. Vel melius Monicus dictus
est Polifemus ab unitate oculi 31
quia unicum oculum habebat in
fronte. Hic gigas unus legitur 32
fuisse habitans iuxta litus maris ;
hic multos sociorum Ulixis devora-

7. Cf. Mythographi 2. 134 ; 1. 23. 31. Cf. Mythographus 3. 11. 9.

8. Suppl. ex Mythographo Primo, Ch. 23. 32. Cf. Guillaume de Conches, In Boe-
9. Cf. Mythographus 3. 15. tium, BN Latin 14380, fol. 92r.
10. Boethius, De consolatione philosophiae
4, meter 7, also Guillaume de Conches, In
Boetium, glosses to this passage.
r. litarent (?) Conieci.
s. De cum erant, ut vid.
 IN SATIRAM 1.10-12
Frontonis etc hic reprehendit su-
perfluitatem poetarum platani Fron-
tonis illius magnum et marmora
clamant etc resonant per echo. In
hoc notat garulitatem discipulorum
et < obstrepentem > t. Quidam
volunt allegorice per platanos intel-
ligere discipulos, provectores per
marmora duros, et etiam summa
illi qui videntur perfecti, et qui
videntur perfecti sunt garuli et
columne in quibus se dicunt, vel
allegorice
t. obtrepantiam, W.
101
verat et dum die quadam in antro
suo dormiret terebravit ei oculum.
Postea abfugit, Polifemus vero non
videns eum non potuit aprehendere,
sed post ipsum cepit ornos iaculari.
Et hoc quippe, quod ita de Poli-
fe<mo > legitur fabulosum est, non
fabula ; subestque veritas argu-
mento. Polifemus enim , quasi
puerilis visus, superbia est, quia
videtur puero quod multa et sciat
et videat. Unum solum oculum
habet scilicet solam consideratio-
nem temporalium , et illum habet in
fronte, id est in ostentatione quia
pueri animo ad ostentationem et
iactanciam faciunt 33. Ulixes vero
puerilis superbie oculum carpat,
quia sapiens qui Ulixes est quasi
olonxeon dicitur, id est omnium
peregrinus, quoniam hic peregrina-
tio est. Conversatio autem nostra
in celis est 34 ; ille considerationem
temporalium et appetitum con-
tempnit.
Frontonis ostendit non esse mirum
si scribat quia scribunt et regunt
scolas quibus ipse prevalet, vel
etiam ipsos poetas de multitudine
et garulitate reprehendat . Fronto
quidam epicurus erat cuius fuit sen-
tentia voluptatem esse summum
bonum. Ideo, quod multos habebat
sequaces, in ortis igitur Frontonis
erant platani, marmora, et CO-
lumpne. Platani ad delectationem
visus, marmora ad sedendum et sus-
tendandos liberos, columne ad
reclinandum et ad decorem ; sed hec
clamabant id est resonabant per
echo, tanta erat ibi habundantia
discipulorum. Vel per platanum
que est arbor alta accipe provectos
33. Cf. Mythographus 3. 11. 9.
34. Ad Philippenses 3. 20.
102 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

et capacioris ingenii homines, per

marmora dure cervicis populum 35 ;
per columnas magistros 36 quod eas
dicit << rupte assiduo lec < tore> » ;
intellige magistros crebris interro-
gationibus vexatos. Potes et per
platanum que est arbor alta et
infructuosa illos intelligere qui
sapientes volunt videri, et non
sunt. In eo quod dicit rupte gar-
rulitatem , in eo quod assiduo lectore
multitudinem notat.

Expectes diceret aliquis « quid ita reprehendis ? Non scribent nisi qui
scribere et debent et sciunt. » Ad hoc respondetur « imo qui nesciunt
similiter ut et qui sciunt. » et nos ergo quia posset abicie : « Quid ad
te pertinet scribere et alios reprehendere qui numquam didicisti ? »
Iccirco per perifrasim ostendit se fuisse, dicens se ferule manum
suposuisse. Ferula proprie est olus cuius truncum ferunt peregrini a
monte Gargano, quod ita est calide nature quod ex vento et collisione
unius ad aliud multociens incenditur. Magistri ergo, considerantes
tarditatem ingenii ex sanguine circa cor congelato procedere, pueros in
sinistra manu 37, que magis pro<p >inque f est cordi, cum instrumento de
huius modi arbore facto, percutiebant. Et ita sanguis in manu commotus
alium impellebat et ille alium, et ita donec calefieret sanguis ille qui circa
cor congelatus erat, et sic excitaretur ingenium. Et nos consilium
quoniam multi sub disciplina sunt qui nihil proficiunt. Iste postquam
. uisse † monstravit, monstrant et se profecisse et nos dedimus consilium
quia sapientis est dare consilium. De quo Silla dicat nescimus quia
plures fuerunt Sille. Quicumque tamen fuit ille, ab eo petiit consilium
qualiter et viveret securus et dormiret, et dedit ei consilium ut parvo
contentus esset. Et tunc secure dormiret privatus, id est omissis
maioribus. stulta diceret aliquis « saltem ut parcas, < parsimonia > &
debes abstinere a scriptura. » Ideo dicit << quia sive scribat, sin non tamen
peritura est carta inutilibus aliorum scriptis vel necessitate » ; et vere
periture.
cum tot ubique etc cur tamen hucusque reprehendit poetas inutiliter
scribentes; nunc ostendit quare potius scribat satiram quam aliud.
hoc campo id est hac materia per quem Alumnus Alumnus Arunce fuit
Lucilius, primus inventor satire quem iste imitatur 38. Arunca civitas est

35. Exod. 32. 9, et Actus Apos. 7. 51

36. et seq. ms. P solum .
37. Cf. Regula monachorum, n. 11 .
38. Scholia, p . 4.
e. intellige obici pro abici (?).
f. proinque, P.
g. Parcameno, P.
 IN SATIRAM 1.14-26 103

de qua fuit ille Lucilius. Per equos ingenium accipe quod velox est ad
modum equi, quia materia hec modo illah comprehendit. si vacat notat
Romanos magis negotiis servilibus intentos quam liberalibus et placidi per
hoc notat eos rebeles et obvios rationibus. Docet etiam qualiter audire
debeamus, scilicet ut non simus t ... † obstrepentes sed atenti cum tener
promiserat se ostensurum quare potius satiram quam aliud scriberet.
Ecce quare: cum tener spado Inter spadonem et castratum hoc interest,
quod castratus potuit dici etiam habens testiculos, sed ex frigiditate nature
non < curans > i illud officium, et dicitur castratus quasi caste natus.
Spado vero dicitur ille qui amitit fratres. Spadonum alii sunt teneri ut
qui ante annos castrantur ante scilicet tempus coitus ; alii duri hii scilicet
qui post annos. Teneri vero nec habunt appetitum nec effectum; duri
appetitum habunt quam sepe, effectum vero raro, nec generare possunt
quoniam minoratus est in eis naturalis calor ab a<b >cisione virilium ',
que calorem augent in homine. Unde frigescit sperma ; nimis etiam
liquidum et ita non est aptum conceptui, et teneri spadones proprie
eunuchi vocantur, id est boni nuruum custodes. Erat ergo tanta Roma-
norum avar<i >ciam, quod etiam teneri spadones causa solius pecu-
ni<ae > n et hereditatis uxores ducebant, quod hoc loco notat auctor 39.
Et suspenditur constitutio usque ad illum locum ; difficile est satiram
< non scribere >. Mevia figere apros t ... † , quod intelligit venari, virile
erat officium quod mulieres < usurpabant > °. Per Meviam etiam
similes reprehendit. Tuscum: quod dicit Tuscum notat regionem illam
habundare apris, scilicet Tusciam patricios aliud notat vicium quod unus
vilis et de humili plebe pro opibus suis nobilibus se preferebat . Nomine
tamen non exprimit: quis sit ille ? - sed descriptione ut magis eum
ledat, quod prave descriptiones plus ledunt quam nomina. Dicunt quidam
hunc fuisse Eliodorum, familiarem Neronis, vel de quolibet tali dicatur.
Patricii dicebantur illi qui erant de senatorio ordine quasi patres curium,
vel patricios intellige eos qui paterno affectu rem p<ublicam > servabant.
quo tondente dicens tondente notat eum de vili officio fuisse, quia
tonsorem sonabat ex re ; utrumque et instrumentum et artificem vitu-
perat ; in hoc etiam notat avariciam eius quia bonum instrumentum >
non habebat ; sic construe gravis mihi quia iuvenes [alio] P odio habunt
barbam. cum pars quia posset putari nobilis et civis et liber ; ostendit
eum esse ignobilem, vocans eum partem plebis, quia plebs est collatio
ignobilium tantum populus nobilium et igno<bilium >, et adiungens
Niliace monstrat advenam quia de Egiptiis erat, vere nam quoque eum

39. Cf. Isidorus , 17. 5. 6.

h. illo (?) .
i. currans, P.
k. minoratus est, conieci minutus est.
1. ascisione, P.
m. avaracia, P.
n. pecunius, P.
o. ursupabant, P.
p. alio (post iuvenes), exp.
104 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

nominans, conditionem notat scilicet talem quod servus erat. Notat quod
servorum alii emuntur, alii in prelio capiuntur ; alios dono habemus, alii
ex ancillis nostris nobis nascuntur. Proprie vero verna dicitur servus ille
qui ex ancilla nascitur. Canopum opidum est in Egipto humero
revocante notat eius super <b > iam r lacernas genus est vestis ; a latere
et cerno, et potest dici quelibet vestis subtilis 40, vel palla estivum aurum
notat anulos minoris ponderis, sed pro illo parvo pondere sudabant eius
digiti. difficile hucusque fuit hironos, id est orationis suspensio. Nam
quis bene dico quod difficile est non scribere, nam quis posset pati scelera
urbis sine reprehensione ? lectica genus est vehiculi quod mulierum est
tantum, unde dicit nova quia non solebant viri eo uti Matonis Mato
causidicus quidam erat qui per urbem faciebat se ferri in lectica unde
luxuriosus et effeminatus notari poterat plena hic pinguedinem eius notat
post hunc delatorem magni amici intelligit Eliodorum, quia Neroni fami-
liaris nobiles ergo < ipse > s acusabat 41 magni dicit hironice quia nullum
magnum habebat. comesa distat inter comestum et comesum, quia
comestum est quod totum consumptum est, quod comesum quod ex
parte 42. Iste vero Eli < odorus > iam multam partem nobilium des-
truxerat, non tamen omnes, sed facta scilicet erat ; vel de Nerone potest
legi. Massa vel sit proprium nomen vel per massam quamlibet divitem
accipe propter massam pecunie, vel massa id est multitudo populi, vel sit
pupilli nomen, vel sit apelativum quia a caris amicis accipiebat. et a
trepido Latinus habuerat rem cum Messalina uxore Neronis 43, quam
comperto Eliodorus minatus est se sed dicturum imperatori, nisi ille
propriam uxorem ei submiteret. Latinus timens, submisit ei uxorem.
Utrumque ergo reprehendit de adulterio. Cum te submoveant ecce alia
< causa > quare scribat satiram, autem notat quoddam vicium Roma-
norum quo materie laborabant, cum vidue mulieres lecatores faciant
heredes. Mos erat apud Romanos ut quilibet moriturus in testamento
scriberet qualiter vellet res suas disponi. Scribebant ergo in testamentis
heredem et legatarium. Distabat autem inter heredem et legatarium quia
heres scribebatur in tot cum t omne; legatarius in parte sine omni scribebatur.
Ergo < primum > + ▾ heres in toto non quod totum habiturus sed quia
totum in manus suas veniebat, et ipse aliis dividebat prout testamenti actor
disposuerat. Cum omne scribebatur quia oportebat eum reddere et in
causis. Secundo: legatarius vero in parte scribebatur quia partem
suam, id est legatum suum quod divisum fuerat in testamento ei, ab
herede testatoris accipiebat, et sine omni scribebatur quia nec in causa

40. Cf. Isidorus, 19. 24. 14.

41. Cf. Scholia, p . 4.
42. Cf. Isidorus, 20. 1. 1 .
43. Cf. Scholia, p . 5.
q. humero, ut vid., P.
r. superiam, P.
s. ipsum , P.
t. con pro cum, P.
v. <primum > † , ( illegibile, supplevi).
 IN SATIRAM 1.26-40 105

sedebat nec debita reddebat. Licebat ergo viris testamenta facere et

viduis tantum mulieribus, sed vidue heredes et legatarios in testamentis
scribeba<n >t w lecatores, et filios suos et filias exhereditabant ; illud
itaque vicium in hoc loco notat. Sic leges difficile satiram est non
scribere. Cum te submoveant ab hereditate tua a pupill<o > *, illi
noctibus non etc defendendo ; sed vetulam subagitando, non sudando
sed sub<eu >ndo y merentur testamentum ut in hereditatem tuam sustitu-
antur carta accepta. Testamentum est ultima voluntas vel scriptum
cuiuslibet quid de suis rebus fieri velit diffiniensis ; et dicitur testamentum
a testibus quia ad minus quinque testibus confirmabatur. in celum
quos extollit et famosos facit vesica beate vetule vesicam ponit pro vulva
quia iuxta illam est, et similis ei. Nota quod bene iungit vetule et beate,
nam si prime essent etatis non darent lecatoribus, sed ab eis acciperent.
Item sine tula essent et pauper nihil posset dare, sed vetula et beata, id
est dives multa posset dare. noctibus id est nostris temporibus optima
summi pro quia hic est modus quo homo fieri dives potuit et summus

nequit. Diceretne aliquis 11 « ad- Unciolam probat lecatores testa-

querat aliquid hec ». Magister
respondet : <<« ita quod unusquisque
iuxta quantitatem sue virge acci-
pit », hoc est Proculeius habet enim
quia parvam habet virgam sed
Gillo qui magnam habet deuncem
scilicet , id est as vel livra ; duo-
decim sunt uncie . Subtracta una
uncia de asse , vel libra qui idem
est , remanet deunx , id est pondus
xi unciarum .
Subtractis duobus unci < i > s▾ de
asse fit decuns, id est pondus x
unciarum . Subtractis tribus fit
dodrans scilicet pondus novem
unciarum. Subtractis iiiior fit bisse,
id est pondus viii unciarum que
dicitur a nobis << marca. » Sub-
tractis v que fit septum, pondus
scilicet vii unciarum. Subtractis vi
menta mereri vetulas subagitando,
quia unusquisque iuxta mensuram
virilis virge ; unceolam Proculeus
habet sed Gillo deuncem. Quid
uncia vel unceola vel deun<x >
videamus : Uncia proprie apud
antiquos xii pars libre vel assis dice-
batur, antiqui enim libram vel
assem pondus illud vocabant, quod
in xii uncias poterat dividi. Hodie
unaqueque civitas pondera et uncias
suas habet, hec maius pondus illa
minus. Undecimam vero partem
libre vocabant deuncem. xa pars
docuns vel dextans dicebatur, nona
dodans, viiia bisse vel iabus, viia
sextuns, sexta semis, va quinquns,
iiiia triens quasi pars tercia, iiia
quadrans quasi pars quarta , iia
sextans quasi pars sexta, pars duo-

w. scribebat, P.
x. pupille, P.
y. subando, P.

11. et seq. iterum codd. W et P incipiunt.

v. uncis , W ; (Partes assis sunt ; deunx,
decunx, dodrans, bessis , septunx, semis,
quincunx, triens , quadrans, sextans, uncia) .
E
106 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
fit semis, id est media pars assis.
Subtractis vii fit quincuns, pondus
v unciarum. Subtractis octo re-
manet triens id est tertia pars
assis, quatuor enim in iii pars xii.
Subtractis novem remanet qua-
drans, id est quarta pars assis.
Subtractis x remanet sextans, id est
sexta pars assis. Subtractis xi
remanet uncia cuius diminutum est
unciola, vel enim uncia duodecima
pars assis vel libre d<eun >st
vero pondus undecim unciarum et
sic quisque
accipiat partes hereditatis ad iuxta
mensuram suas < ad > mensuram
id est virilis virge que est iuxta
inguem sane mercedem sanguinis-
quia nimi <us > w sumatur sanguis,
unde Gallinus plus debilitatur homo
interplicato coitu quam in una
minutione si consumtione sanguinis
sequitur X pallor, et hoc etiam sic
palleat ex nimio coitu ut pallet ex
timore qui prostantis naturale est
homini anguem † aborr<ere > + aut
palleat sicut
rethor dicturus aut Lugdunensem
Lugdunum est civitas Gallie quasi
lucidum dunam , id est lucidus
mons, dunam enim in Greco mons
w. nimia, W (verbum post nimius exp. et
illegibile).
x. sequi (?), W.
decima uncia. Ita primum hec
nomina partium libre vel assis fue-
runt, sed postea inolevit apud anti-
quos consuetudo ut in cuiuscumque
rei xii partes equas dividerent. Pars
xiia uncia diceretur vel unceola,
undecim < partes > z deuns, decem
docuns vel dextans, et ad hunc mo-
dum singularum partium quantitas
quemadmodum et partes duodecim ,
partes hereditatis
Gillo deuncem unde datur quod ille
virile membrum habebat minimum,
iste magnum
partes quisque verba sunt vidue vel
Iuvenalis ; inguinis, id est virilis
membri sane mercedem quasi dice-
ret bene debet habere quisque par-
tes suas quia sane id est certe hoc
est precium et merces sanguinis id
est spermatis quod fit ex priori,
sanguine de <s >cendente a ab omni-
bus membris, et sic palleat fre-
quenti enim cohitu pallet ho< mo>
quia extinguitur calor in eo, dum
sanguis, qui confert calorem, minui-
tur ut nudis Qui anguem premit
abhorret et frigescit et ex frigiditate
congelatur sanguis circa cor, et
tunc sanguis exterior ad cordis
confort<at >ionem ad interiora
tendit, et cor frigiditate oppressum
concitat. Sic ergo pallet homo,
sanguine a superficie fugiente ; vel
presso angue, venenum quod sic-
c<um > best vere sanguine exsiccat,
et sic pallet homo
aut Lugdunensem Lugdunum civi-
tas est, prima sedes Gallie, et dici-
tur Lugdunum quasi lucidus mons
sicut Laudunum laudatus mons 44,
44. Cf. Du Cange 3. 215.
z. parstes, P.
a. decendente, P.
b. sicce, P.
 IN SATIRAM 1.40-46
est in Latino. In hac civitate boni
oratores erant ; cum igitur Romani
aliquem rethorem volebant exami-
nare mitebant eum Lugndunum ibi
ante aram Mercurii, qui est deus
eloquentie. Coram orationibus
illius civitatis unam causam cer-
tabat, sed mos est quod cum novus
homo coram sapientibus est dic-
turus pre stupore pallescit, scilicet
quid referam aliam subiungit cau-
sam dicens quid id est : quare
referam queritur Referam ardeat
ira id est cor sicut quia cor natu-
raliter est calidum et siccum et
bene dicit cor ardere ex ira animi.
Ira sibi ... homo ; < colera > y
rubera, que in felle est, diffundit
per corpus, que veniens ad cor
accendit illud. Deinde subiungit
unum cor suum ardeat scilicet hic
notabilis z nequitia sine nomine
spoliator pupilli et matre et patre
carentis premit populum gregibus
comitum enim tot comites quod
populum prement ; prostare est pro
precio stare. Isti vero spoliatores
pupillorum ad tantam paupertatem
y. ocula (pro colera) W.
z. natabilis, W.
107
et Caustrundum castrum mons 45
Dunam enim mons est et ibi con-
ventus erat sapientum , ibi de
magnis agebant quia ibi causas
tractabant, nullusque orator auten-
ticus habebatur donec in conventu
Lu<g >dunensi causam tractasset.
Retor ante in tanto ceni d dicturus
pre timore pallebat. Aram vocat
locum in quo conventus erat ; vel
aliter Lugdunum locus erat pena-
rum quo loco rei plectebantur et
ibi placita terebrantur cum aliquis
alium vel de furto vel de homicidio
timebat ; locum ergo illum vocat
aram ludunensium. Rethorem vo-
cat illum qui accusatus pro se
stabat in causa qui sive reus sive
non pallebat pre timore videns
locum penarum proximum.
quid referam ad aliud transit vi-
cium , et est preocupatio dum
quedam ponit interrogando quare
illa poneret iecur id est cor ; bene
dicit ardeat ira quia ira est calor
accidentalis et non naturalis ex
colera progrediens , id est cista
fellis 46
spoliator pupilli hunc Eliodorum
accipe qui pupillos exhereditabat ;
prostare est pro precio stare, et est
proprie meretricum pupilli pros-
tantis id est pro precio stantis quia
amissis hereditatibus , pre pauper-
45. Cf. Heiric, Vita de St. Germani, Bk.
IV. « quod sit Mons lucidus idem »> , in PL,
124, cols. 1124-1279.
46. vide, p. 118.
c. ludunensi , P.
d. ceni, P, ut vid ; vel cecu.
108 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
< reducebant > a eos quod coge-
bant eos prostare vel licite vel
illicite.
Ac hic diceret aliquis « nonne lex
dampnat spoliatores pupillorum ? »
Respondetur <« ita, sed nichil nocet
hodie illa dampnatio, » et hoc est
ac hic spoliatorem dampnatus id
est legum scilicet inani quia pena
non sequitur iudicium
quid enim non sine pena quia
saltem inde attrahit infamiam .
Respondetur : « hi non curant, quid
enim nocet ? >> infamia nummis
salvis ac si diceret « nichil » exul
ab octava < alia > b causa quare
scribit satiram, scilicet gulositas
imperatoris ; sed quia non est ausus
reprehendere illum notat per inte-
gumentum. sic
Marius exul id est Nero com-
parabilis Mario exuli in nequitia
vitii. Ille consilio et auxilio suorum
multos Romanos occidit et maxime
nobiles ; sic et iste vero bibit ab
octava hora, quod erat criminale
apud Romanos, sic enim prelatorum
vita erat ordinata : Quod in mane
irent ad triumphales arcus in quibus
erant picte antiquorum victorie ut
tota die illorum memores nite-
rentur effici illis similes . Deinde
ad Apollinem qui deus est sapientie
a. reduncebant, W.
b. aliam , W.
tate nimia utriusque sexus pueri
venales efficiebantur. Unde et in
hoc graviter illum Eliodorum re-
prehendit qui prostare cogebant,
vel prostantis id est t ... te procul
ab hereditate stantis vel prostantis
id est pro precio stantis t ... † f ad
operandum serviliter
ac hic da< m >natus & diceret ali-
quis << non spoliat pupillum inpune
quia inde da<m >natur h ». Re-
spondetur << inanis est da <m >na-
tio i », et hoc est
ac hic est posset iterum subdik,
<< saltem fama ledit eum ». Ad hoc
dicit non esse curandum de infamia
enim id est quia quid infamia salvis
nummis simile legis in Persio de
avaro famam non curante et di-
cente : populus me sibilat at mihi
plaudo, ipse domi ; simul et num-
mos contemplor in archa 47.
exul ab octava 48 Hic Neronem de
gulositate reprehendit. Ordo vite
Romanorum talis erat : summo
mane ibant ad templum Apollonis
et Minerve, qui erant dei sapientie ;
iuxta illud primum querite regnum
Dei 49. Deinde ibant ad triumphales
archus, in quibus historie Romano-
rum descripte erant, et erant ibi
sculpte imagines maiorum bene
meritorum. De re p<ublica > con-
veniebant igitur ibi Romani, ut
facta virtutis memorie commen-
47. Horatius Sermones 1. 1. 66-67.
48. Cf. Plinius minor, Epistolae 2. 11.
49. Matt. 6. 33.
e. post est illegibile.
post stantis illegibile.
g. Dagnatus , P.
h. dagnatur, P.
i. dagnatio, P.
k. subdi, ut vid.
 IN SATIRAM 1.47-49
ut sapientium, rem publicam dis-
ponent ; postea iudices prepositi ad
Forum veniebant ad diffiniendas
< controversias > c plebis ; sena-
tores vero ad Capitolium convenie-
bant ubi de summis curis < rei >
p<ublicae > tractabant usque ad
horam nonam Tunc demum come-
debant. Nero vero tante erat gulo-
sitatis quod integra hora ante
tempus legitimum epulabatur, et
< nota > d quod dicit bibit et non
comedit, maius enim crimen est
superflua potere quam superflua
comestio, quia plura mala inde
proveniunt.
fruitur dis id est Ce<r>eree et
Bacho, commedendo et bibendo
iratis inde quia a tali persona
consumatur. Ac tu diceres « ali-
qui <d > f condonabile hoc est in
isto quia facit populum vivere in
pace et gaudio. » Respondetur « nec
immo in lacrimis t ... † sit, vero
epulabatur, sed tu »>
c. controversas, W.
d. notat, W.
e. cepere, W.
f. aliquis (?), W.
109
darent et eos imitari studerent.
Deinde dividebantur, et proficisce-
batur senatus ad capitolium ut de
secretis rebus ibi agerent, consules,
tribuni, pretores ad Forum ut ibi
publicas causas tractarent. Et
morabantur hii in Foro, illi in
Capitolio usque ad nonam horam et
tunc comedebant. Sed Nero gulo-
lositate sua hunc ordinem < per-
vertebat > et ab octava hora
comedebat, et de hoc eum repre-
hendit sed non proprio nomine, sed
satis competentem circumlocutione
eum notat, vocans eum Marium
exulem. Marius quidam consul Ro-
manus fuit quem valde inimicum
nobilitati Silla in exilium coegit, qui
a Numidis quos devicerat receptus,
profugas et exules convocavit et
cathenas et ferrea vincula eorum
confregit, et ex eis enses et alia
arma fabricari fecit. Et contra
Romanos progrediens, urbem cum m
nobilibus devastavit, nec post tem-
pus illud aliquem nobilium secum
habuit, sec servos tantum et exules.
Huic ergo Mario Nero similis erat
in eo quod et nobiles deprimebat,
et exules et advenas complices
habebat
et fruitur dis id est Cerere et
Baccho iratis, quia a tali consu-
mantur : dicit Augustinus in libro
De doctrina christiana quia inter
frui et uti distancia est, illis enim
proprie uti dicimur quibus non
propter se sed propter aliud uti-
mur, ut temporalibus si bene his
utamur non propter se sed ut viva-
mus utimur et ut celestia prome-
reamur 50. Illis autem fruimur qui-
50. Augustinus, De doctrina christiana
1. 22.
1. prevertabant, P.
m. con, P.
110 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
provincia post victrix modo ploras
cuius tot sunt vitia non, id est non
quid credam ? hec vitia.
digna Venusina lucerna id est satira.
Satira dicitur lucerna quia nudat et
aperte vicia. Dicitur satira venusina
propter Hor <atium, > qui fuit de
Venusina opido natus ; satiram
composuit
et non agitem hec id est reprehen-
dam, sed que magis agitem
Heracleas id est fabulas de Hercule
aut Diomedeas fabulas de Diomede,
filio Tidei
aut mugitum id est mugientem in
laberunto. Id est minotaurum
Pasiphe 12. Uxor Minois regis tau-
rum fertur adamasse que 8, cum
nollet ei consentire, manifestavit
amorem suum Dedalo. Dedalus
vero, vaca acerna composita, in-
clusit intus Pasiphem et sic taurus
deceptus est ; in ea animal genuit
in parte hominem in parte taurum,
qui quia reputatus est filius Minois
12. Cf. Servius, In Aeneidem 6. 14.
g. qui (?), W.
bus tantum pro se vescimu<r > ",
unde bene dicitur fruitur
ac tu victrix quia posset in
gulositate peccare et tamen bene
patriam regere et ita laudandus
esset ; hoc illi aufert ac tu victrix
non modo sed quondam post ego
vicia scilicet e<ner>vata non cre-
dam digna
Venusina lucerna id est repre-
hensione simili et Horatiane. Venu-
sinum est opidum de quo Hor < a-
tius fuit qui satiram scripsit 51.
Lucernam vocat satiram quia quo
modo lucerna abscondita manifestat,
ita viciorum occulta denudat
agitem id est frequenter agam
reprehensiones
sed quid magis quare magis de
fabulis scribentur melius quam est
ut reprehendam
Heracleas id est fabulas de Hercule
Diomedeas id est fabulas de Dio-
mede
mugitum id est fabulam de Mino-
tauro 52. Legitur Pasiphe amasse
taurum et cum eo concubuisse
sub acerna vaca quam fecit
Dedalus, et peperisse monstrum
in parte hominem et in parte
taurum quem inclusi<t > P Minos
in domo artificio tali composi-
ta ut quisquis eam exire putaret
potius intraret. Unde accepit
nomen, dicta laberintus, quasi labor
51. Cf. Scholia, p. 6.
52. Cf. Mythographus 1. 44.
n. vescimus, P.
o. euuanta, P.
p. inclusi , P.
 IN SATIRAM 1.50-55 111

sed filius erat tauri, Minataurus intus. In rei veritate Taurus fuit
vocatus est. Ad hunc includendum, cancellarius Minois quem amavit
ne alicui noceret, Minos fecit a Pasiphe, et cum eo sub acerna vaca,
Dedalo talem domum componi, a id est in acerna domo quam fecerat
qua cum aliquis putabat exire Dedalus, concubuit ; quem in ea
intrabat, cum intrare exiebat, unde minataurum genuit, non est aliud
et laberintus quasi labor intus nisi quod puerum qui nomine erat
vocatus est. Deinde cognito quod filius Minois. In rei veritate
per Dedalum Pasiphe predictum cancellar<i >um habuit, qui Mino
perpetrasset adulterium, Minos cum inclusus est in domo, vero poterat
eius filio Icaro posuit illum in exire. Non est aliud quam quod
carcere ; Dedalus vero aptat pennas comperto adulterio a Minoe in
sibi, cum filio volando fugit sed exilio missus est 53.
cum filius nimis alte volaret, liqui-
facta cera, qua penne coniun <ge >-
bantur , in mare cecidit, unum
mare Iccarum vocatur. Cuius rei hec
est veritas : Minos habebat cancel-
larium nomine Taurum quem Pa-
siphe adamavit cum qua in thalamo
a Dedalo immoderate composito
eodem consentiente concubuit. Fi-
lium genuit qui erat filius Tauri sed
reputatus filius Minois. Fabulose
th ... et se ... os t est dictus et
Minostaurus vocatus. Quo com-
perto Minos Dedalum cum filio,
quia consenserat adulteris, misit in
carcere ; qui inde remigio fugit,
propter velocitatem navum volasse
dicitur. Sed orta tempestate filio
submerso, Dedalus evasit ; et magis
narrem, mare percussum puero, id
est Icaro cum cedidit in illud et
+fab<rum > id est Dedalum 13.

enim cum leno alia causa est quare
scribat satiram accipiat bona mechi
leno est ille qui suam et alterius
vendit uxorem, ita dico si nullum
ius id est potestas
cum leno item difficile est satiram
non scribere cum leno leno est qui
uxorem suam vendit. Dictus leno
a leniendo, quia omnes lenit et
trahit in domum suam

si capiendi ne ab hominibus sciatur si capiendi quia si videat leno quod

uxor sua pretium mereatur accipere

13. Cf. Scholia, p. 7. 53. Cf. Servius, In Aeneidem 6. 14.

h. coniunbantur, W. q. cancellarum, P.
112 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
doctus spectare lacunar secundum i
Isodorum lacunar quoddam genus
lapidis laurei 14 qui in altum sus-
pensum lucet, inde dicitur lacu-
nar quasi lucens in ere. Leno vero
qui propriam uxorem vendit, la-
cunar spectat ut interim quasi eo
nesciente quid uxorem suam tran-
seat
doctus ad calicem id est super
calicem ac si dormiat
naso vigilanti ac si diceret cum
vigilet. Fingit se predicta causa
dormire
cum fas esse ad hunc est difficile
abstinere a satira cum fas esse
putet licitum sibi
sperare curam chohortis id est
tribuniciam potestatem, quia curam
choortis habebant tribuni. Mili-
tum in choorte sunt † ... † . Ille
+ ... +* quia donavit bona presepibus
in id est lupanaribus. Presepe
14. Cf. Isidorus, 20. 10. 4.
i. sed, ut vid., emendavi secundum.
k. post sunt illegibile ; post ille ille-
gibile.
pro pudore, accipit, vel si pro
+ < cum > + r lege ut sit sensus
mechus id est adulter quasi ad
alterius lectum qui aliena abutitur
uxore nullum ius capiendi licet uxor
prohibita sit a viro ut non accipiat
pretium, sed dimitat eum accipere,
quia timet leno ne si accipiat ali-
quid, furetur
lacunar equivocum est ad foveam in
qua confluunt immundicie domus,
et tunc compositum est a lacu ; et
ad laupadam s eream, et tertio
+ compositum> † est a luceo et
ere ; de utraque ergo potest legi
quod dicit
doctus etc stertit enim et fingit se
dormire ut libere post tergum eius
possit adulter transire
cum fas esse aliam su<b > dit t cau-
sam quare difficile sit, id est cum
ille scilicet qui bona scilicet anteces-
sorum suorum consumpsit luxu-
riose, speret se adepturum aliquem
dignitatem, et hoc equipollentum
divino his verbis
curam cohortis legio constat ex sex
milibus sex centis sexagintis viris ;
agmen ex centum viris ; choors ex
L, maniplis ex xx ; dignitas < que-
dam > ▾ erat preesse legioni, quedam
preesse agmini, similiter preesse
r. < cum > , lectio incerta : † c... † ;
conieci cum.
s. laupadam, sic P.
t. suddit, P.
v. quamdam, P.
 IN SATIRAM 1.55-62
dicitur locus in quo commedunt
animalia, dictus sic a sepe que illa
preponitur. Sed hic ponitur pro
lupanari quia ut equi devorant in
presepi farraginem, sic meretices in
lupanari bona amatorum . Una
meretrix lupa vocatur et eius habi-
taculum lupanar.
et caret omni maiorum donando
illo meretricibus
dum pervolat hic iterum notat
Neronem 15 sine nomine per quam-
dam circumlocutionem ; <a>
< contrario > ¹ difficile non scribere.
dum ipse id est Nero omnibus
notabilis
pervolat Flaminiam illum vicum, et
bene poterat volare pervolat Auto-
medon auriga
tenebat lacernate servi currus ; hic
ponit Autemedon pro auriga 16 quia
iste percus<it > m auriga Achilles,
vel enim mos auctorum propria
nomina illorum qui in aliquo pre-
valent officio pro apellativis nomi-
nibus officiorum ponere.
Unde Ovidius Thipis et Authe-
medon dicar amoris ego 17 id est
nauta et auriga, et nota in hoc qui
dicit aurigam puerum notat eum
paticum, dum id est pervolat id est
Nero monstrabilis super osia se
15. Scholia, p. 7.
16. Ibid.
17. Ovidius, Ars amatoria 1. 8.
1. contero (?) W post circumlocutionem.
m. percusimus, W.
113
chorti et maniplo 54 quia bona
donavit id est consumsit bona in
presepibus, id est fornicibus 55 ; sci-
licet quedam loca erant Rome
proprie meretricum ad modum pre-
sepium facta et fornices vocabantur,
unde et forni <c >ari w. Vel per
presepe lupanar accipe, quia sicut
bruta in presepi devorant ea que
sibi aponuntur ita meretrices in
lupanari familias devorant leccato-
rum
maiorum antecessorum suorum ,
dum pervolat difficile est etiam
non scri<bere>
cum videam quod ipse id est
notabilis, ille Neronem vocat ipsum
expressime quasi notabilem pervolat
Flaminiam illum vicum citato id est
commoto auxe id est curru
puer Automedon Automedon pro-
prium nomen aurige Achillis 56, hic
tamen apelativum est pro quolibet,
per hoc quod dicit puer Neronem
notat de illo vicio. Sic leges veloci
curru fertur ille Nero, et quid est
quod sapiens Auriga moderatur ?
currum tenebat lora id est regebat
currum et hoc dum lacernate iac-
taret aurige, suo vel de alio. La-
cerna proprie virorum est pallium,
clamis mulierum ; per hoc ergo
quod dicit lacernate notat virum
54. Isidorus 9. 3. 47.
55. Cf. Horatius, Sermones 1. 2. 30.
56. Cf. Scholia, p. 7.
w. fornibari, P.
8
114 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
aila ". Lacerna est genus virilis
indumenti < quod > medi <o >
prelatu<m > • cervi unde et lacerna
dicitur. Et nota quod nimis
mordaciter lacernate amice ut per
vestimentum notaret masculum per
amicam coitum, et nota iactaret :
mos enim amatorum se coram
amicis iactare.
nonne alia causa et nonne libet
medio ceras quia antiqui in cera
solebant scribere capaces doctorum
et dicendorum medio quadrivio in
quo ab hominibus videbantur vel
imm<o> feratur medio quadrivio
id est si non habere domum in qua
scriberem, et etiam sub aere expo-
situs pluvie et calori scribere ; et
subiungit
cum atque id est Eliodorus qui
custodiebat sigillum imperatoris
sexta cervice feratur quia luxuriose
super cervicem servorum faciebant
se deferi
hinc patens atque erat criminale in
homine latus suum nudare ; iste
vero ex utraque nudavit, ut
... anrist † appareret. pene cathe-
dra id est penuda illa parte que est
in cathedra ; pene nudat virilibus
n. osia se aila, ut vid.
o. qui medium prelatus, W.
p. imme, W.
q. blurred.
esse cum quo se iactabat Nero 57 ;
per hoc quod dicit amice notat fe-
mineo nomine effeminatum.
nonne libet ostendit se adeo affec-
tare scribere quod etiam si non esset
ibi domus in qua scriberet ante-
quam cessaret a satira scriberet
ipse in mediis quadriviis ; vel aliter
nonne licet ad maiorem viciorum
noticiam et de < vulgatore > x
cum iam sexta usque ad signata
falsa protenditur constructio fal-
sumque signatorem dicit Eliodorum
qui cancellarius erat imperatoris
eiusque sigillum deferebat. Mos
erat ut pupilli sibi facerent firmare
hereditates sigillo imperatoris. Elio-
dorus vero corruptus pecunia alteri
alterius hereditates firmabat, et hoc
est quod dicit auctor eum falsi
signatorem sexta cervice quia adeo
effeminatus erat ille Eli <odorus>
quod a sex hominibus faciebat se
deferri per < mediam >> Romam .
patens hinc et cum quia a sinistro
et a dextro latere diffu<s > usz pene
cathedra nuda id est pene nudatis
illis qui erant in cathedra virilibus
de supino id est supero Mecenate
Mecenas familiaris fuit Augusti
57. Cf. Isidorus 19. 24. 14.
x. vulgatione, P.
y. medium, P.
z. diffutus, P.
 IN SATIRAM 1.62-71
multum id est cum presenti me
supino id est superbo ut enim
Mecenas pro familiaritate Augusti
ex superbia supinus incendebat 18.
Sic iste ex familiaritate Neronis, sic
de superbia et de luxuria illum
notavit ; modo notat eundem de
falsitate et avaricia qui signator
falso id est falsis litteris et sigillis
fecerit se lautum,
id est laudant in dignitatibus atque
beatum in diviciis uda gemma quia
antiqui habebant sigilla de gemmis
facta. Uda : ne adhereat cera
sigillo, fit humidum. Notat ergo
istum de falsitate, cum enim sigil-
lum regis habebat in custodia falso
signando multa adquirebat exiguis
antiqui enim in tabulis solebant scri-
bere. Occurit non tantum ius in
cera.
occurit matrona potens ad repre-
hendendum et subiungit quare :
porrectura instituitque calenum id
est bonum vinum ; et synedoche
species per genera, calenum enim
species vini miscet id est v<inum >,
id est venenum. Rubeta est enim
species rane que habitat in rubis ;
per hanc quia venenosa est vene-
num intellegit, deinde subiungit
vinum habentem cuius precipuum
Locusta illa matrona
18. Cf. Scholia, p. 8.
r. iuri (?) , W.
115
Cesaris probus multum sed super-
bus 58, tamen iste multum referebat
de superbo Mece <nate >, quia
multum superbus erat quem ille
Mecenas dicit ;
lautum in honoribus beatum in
diviciis
uda gemma gemmam vocat sigillum,
udam ideo quia humescit sigillum
antequam imprimatur cera 59 exiguis
tabulis in quibus scilicet ipse scri-
bebat istum in hereditate illius et e
converso ; et
occurit matrona aliam subdit cau-
sa<m > a quare scribat sa<tiram >,
que talis est, quod ipse videt
Romanas mulieres veneficio maritos
suos occidentes vel ut liberius adul-
terari possint vel propter aliquid
aliud, et hoc est matrona potens in
venificiis vel hironice occurit menti
mee, quasi diceret « tales scio que
sic faciunt » vel occurrit ad repre-
hendendum molle calenum bonum
vinum et suave rubetam genus est
rane que circa rubos habitat, que
aponitur in veneficiis et hoc ponitur
pro quolibet veneno instituitque
cum diceret aliquis << et quis docuit
eas ita facere ? » ad hoc respondet
Locusta proprium nomen
58. Cf. Scholia, p. 8.
59. Cf. Scholia, p. 8.
a. causa, P.
116 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
melior aliis in hac vel arte instituit
id est docuit propinquas vel ca-
rentes convicinas rudes in hac arte
effere id est extra ferre
maritos id est mortuos
per famam populum id est per
famam populi et est endiadis $, ac
si diceret «<< negle<g >ot quicquid
diceret populo, hoc audebant >>
aude aliquid etc alia causa talis ;
quia nullus reputatus aliquid, non
alicui dant aliquid, nisi sit crudelis
et tyrannus et hoc est aude aliquid
faciende
dignum brevibus Giaris et carcere
Giarus est brevissima insula in qua
rei in auxilium ponebantur, et de
proprietate « quid prob < itas >
lau<datur> ? quia non possum
negare illam esse honestam » si vis
esse aliquid id est reputari alicuius
pretii
sed alget id est frigescit in corde
laudantium, nichil habens remune-
rationis, sed
criminibus id est criminosis ; et est
enphasis - id est concultante, ubi
accidens ponitur pro subor< t > a ",
ad expressam laudem vel < vitu-
perationem > w
s. endiadis, ut vid.
t. negleto, W.
v. subora (?) , W.
w. vituperium, W.
Melior quasi doctior in dandis vene-
nis instituit docuit propinquas id
est vicinas effere extra domum
ferre
maritos nigros id est mortuos
veneno quia qui veneno moriuntur
aut nigri sunt aut
lividi per famam et populum id est
per famam populi qui hic diffa-
matus est in populo, nec autem
ipse curat de fama
aude aliquid tot et multo plura
sunt vicia Romanorum , et que irem
per singula ; quod inniquum est
hodie apud nos reputatur aliquid,
ma<n >suetib vero et, innocentes
ipsi pro nullis habentur hominibus,
et hoc est
brevibus Gyaris ac si diceret in
exilio
si vis esse aliquid Giare breves
insule sunt apud quas mitebantur
exules 60, tantumdem est ergo quod
dicit < brevibus Giaris >
probitas laudatur et alget probant ;
laudant sed quasi nullos homines
eos inputant et nichil eis tribuunt ;
sed alget, id est penuriam pati : eos
patiuntur criminibus inopes sunt
probi, utpote quibus nihil ab
eis reputantur sed scelerati multa
possident et multa eis dantur quia
ipsi soli valere aliquid existimantur
et hoc est criminibus id est crimi-
nosis hominibus
60. Scholia, p. 9.
b. magsueti, P.
 IN SATIRAM 1.71-79
debent hortos pretoria dignitates
mensas marmoreas vetus argentum
id est preciosum, quia quantum
aurum vel argentum, et veterius
tanto est † pretiosi <us > +
caprum stantem extra pocula Caper
fuit optimus sculcor qui cum ali-
qui poculum componebat ut no-
taret se abstemium ymaginem
suam extra pocula faciebat. Et per
hoc intellegit pretiosa vasa ac si
diceret : << omnia preciosa dantur
improbis ex timore, sed probis, qui
non timentur, quia nullis volunt
nocere, sola datur laus >>
qui patitur etc alia est causa sub
interrogatione < ibidem > quia
adulteri, corrupta nuru pretio, ad
uxorem filii illius accedebant. Iste
discurrenda nocte tantum tumultum
faciebant quo nullum patiuntur
dormire, et quem patitur dormire.
et pretextatus pretexta est genus
indumenti quo soli nobilium filii
utebantur dum erant in studio. In
hoc notat illos et magistros eorum
quia in tempore quo debebant stu-
dere sapientie studebant luxurie et
cum tot fuit vitia
Si natura negat facere versum tam
indignatio facit versum ac si dice-
ret : << naturaliter essem tam bru-
tus qui facere versum nescirem ,
x. aliqui : <sic >,
117
hortos id est fundos pretoria
honores mensas convivia vetus ar-
gentum vasa antiqui temporis
caprum stantem extra pocula Caper
optimus scultor fuerat et semper
quando cisum faciebat extra sese
pingebat ut notaret se esse auste-
mium. Secundum alios Caper
accipe hedum qui pingebatur extra
cisum ad suum dedecus, quia rodit
vitem, sed hanc secundam non apro-
bamus ; sic leges caper etc > id
est cisos bonos de opere Capri qui-
bus ipse se extra pingebat
quem patitur mensis quibusdam
que ad satiram scribendam ipsum
cogant ; subiungit et alia ; nurum
secundum quosdam accipe uxorem
cuiuslibet, sed alios matrem mariti,
de utraque enim posset legi quia
uxor avaricia ducta precium pro se
accipiebat et mater mariti uxorem
filii vendebat
Quem sponse sponsa a spondeo.
† desponsata > † dicitur, sponsa
ergo est antequam ducatur ; post-
quam scilicet firmata est sed des-
ponsata uxor est non tantum ; ergo
sponsatas sed etiam firmatas repre-
hendit turpes id est turpitudinem
operantes praetexatus id est nobilis ;
pretexta enim genus est vestis quo
utebantur nobiles 61
Si natura cum hec et similia videam,
non possum abstinere ; scribam
etiam si natura negaret. Naturam
vocat naturale ingenium hominis,
61. Cf. Macrobius, Saturnalia 1. 6.
118 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
tamen ex dignatione facerem ; » et
si indignatio non facit perfectum
versum facit
qualemcumque potest facere et
quales, id est facio vel saltem
qualem facit Cluvenius ille vilis
poeta. In hoc notat eum quod
nesciret versus componere ; tamen
aponebat,
Ex quo forsitan quereret aliquis
<< cum intendit vicia reprehendere,
cuius etatis vicia reprehendens ? >>
Respondetur « omnium qui fuerant
a Deucalione usque ad hoc tempus. »
quidquid agunt homines ex illo tem-
pore quo Deucalio ascendit montem
navigio Parnasum scilicet ; < ani-
ma > < caluerunt > y que tunc
temporis incolebitur et paulatim etc
quicquid agunt homines ex illo
tempore, scilicet
votum de futuro bono
timor de futuro malo ;
ira de presenti malo
y. per se chenu, W (pro anima calu-
erunt).
dicit ergo si natura negat si non
sufficeret ingenium meum ad scri-
bendum tamen ex indignatione
inciperem, et quia indignatio sine
arte non bonos facit versus,
addit qualencumque potest vel
bonum vel non bonum ; quales ego
vel conclude, id est minime bonos,
et ponit se innuere male versi-
ficantium ut liberius mordeat.
Cluvenius vilissimus poeta fuit.
Ex quo Deucalion diceret aliquis
< cum velis scribere habesne mate-
«
riam ? » Respondetur « immo spa-
ciosam, quia quicquid vicii operati
sunt homines a diluvio Deucalionis
usque nunc est materia mea » ; sic
leges
votum est desiderium animi voce
manifestum ; desiderium quando
non manifestatur voce notat ; vero
si modum teneat non est materia
Iuvenalis, si n<on> c autem eius
materia est
timor de futuro malo et est timor,
timere, timenda, et non timenda,
quod vicium est, et sic materia eius
est
Ira est calor accidentalis procedens
ex colera diffusa a felle mordente
ipsum cor, et est de presenti malo.
Quedam vero ira virtus est qua
contra vicia irascimur, ad quam
< innutabat > d qui dicebat : « iras-
cimini et vo<< s > » et cetera. Hec
c. sin (?) P.
d. inmutabat, P.
 IN SATIRAM 1.79-86
Voluptas de presenti bono
gaudia corporis
discursus eratum vel coactum sunt
farrago id est materia minimi
belli , quia omnia sunt digna repre-
hensione. Farrago, que agitur de
ferre cum purgatur, materia, ut
translatione dicitur farrago quia ea
impletur liber ut ex farragine ani-
malis venter 19. Fabula de Deuca-
19. Cf. Varro, De re rustica 1. 31. 5.
z. minimi (?) ; fortasse libelli pro minimi
belli.
119
autem ira non est Iu<ve >nalise
materia, sed illa cum contra vicia
non est, quia omnis illa vicium est
< Voluptas > f delectatio est carnis.
Hanc accipe omnium sensuum
universalem delectationem sed non
omnes sensuum voluptates illicite
sunt, quia voluit Conditor ut omnis
sensus obletamentum suum haberet
et ideo tam diverse qualitates rebus
date sunt. Pulcritudine colorum
pascitur visus ; concentu sonorum
auditus, odoris < fragrancia > 8
olfactus, dulcedine saporis gustus,
aptitudine corporis tactus, sed ista-
rum quedam licite sunt quedam
illicite. Illicite tantum sunt materia
Iuvenalis quarum quedam et spurce
sunt actu et fede relatu
gaudium delectatio est animi de
presenti bono, quod si modum
excedat materia Iuvenalis est
discursus est mobilitas animi et
inconstancia de uno ad aliud, unde
quidam fugientes unum vicium
incurrunt aliud, ut si fugiunt ava-
riciam incurrent prodigalitatem ,
de quibus dictum est vadent et
venient super illos horribiles dis-
cursus. Hoc autem numquam nisi
vicium est, et ideo bene est materia
Iuvenalis.
quidquid agunt homines est farrago
id est materia. Farrago est proprie
palea frumenti vel furfur ut quidam
dicunt, sed hic ponitur pro materia,
nam sicut farragine replentur ani-
malia, sic liber materia. ex quo
legitur quia continue pluvie facte
e. Iunalis, P.
f. voluntas, P.
g. flagrantia, P.
120 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
lione talis est 20 : superveniente
particulari diluvio in regione qua
habitabat Deucalio. Navigio mon-
tem Parnasum ascendit cum Pirra
uxore. Cessante diluvio quesierunt
Athemidam, que tunc sola ibi cole-
batur, quomodo possent restaurare
ergo humanum. Respondit quod a
si prohicierent ossa matris post
terga, intelligens ergo + < ter-
gum >b terre acumentium [ter-
ram ] † , ossa illa d lapides, proicien-
do lapides post tergum Deucalio
masculos Pirra feminas creavit 21.
Huius fab<ule > hec est veritas :
Deucalio cum Pirra uxore montem
Parnasum ascendit et ibi paucos
pastores lapideos et duros reperit
quos instruendo et se sequi cogendo
dicitur lapides in homines mutasse,
Pirra similiter feminas. Inde equi
duri et homines inculti dicuntur
lapides ; laos enim est lapis 22. Que
vero sola Themis, que in tempore
sors, ibi tunc dicitur regnasse. Hic
significatur id < quod > moderni
ratione administrant, primi sorte
et casu disponebant, et merito nunc
reprehendenda vitia
20. Cf. Isidorus 13. 22.
21. Ovidius, Metamorphoseon 1. 392-95.
22. Cf. Scholia, p. 9.
a. quia (?) , W. (pro quod).
b. n., W. (pro tergum).
c. terram (post acumentium), omissi.
d. ille (?), W.
sunt et operuerunt aque faciem
terre 62. Et evasit solus Deucalion,
cum Pirra coniuge sua 63, ascen-
d<e >ntes h in montem excessum
cum navi ; descend<e >ntibus i vero
pluviis apparuit facies terre. Et
petierunt responsum a Themi dea,
que tunc sola in terris colebatur,
quid essent acturi ; que dixit eis
quod ossa magne parentis post ter-
gum iactarent et iactu viri homines,
iactu mulieris mulieres fierent 64.
Illi vero diu obstupuerunt nescien-
tes, et fecerunt tamen sic, et ita
contigit fabulosum, quek est sed
veritas iacet. Rei veritas est quod
fuit diluvium ut dicit Augustinus 65
particulare non generale. Generale
enim diluvium non nisi miraculo
vitari potest sicut legis de Noe ; par-
tiale autem industria vitari potest.
Illud ergo partiale diluvium in Arme-
nia fuit et submersi sunt omnes
exceptis illis et forsitan aliquibus
pastoribus cum eis, qui ascendentes
Parnasum montem Armenie super-
fuerunt. Tunc vero illa Temis
colebatur, Themis enim est sors et
sola sorte. Tunc vivebant homines
ignorantes alias divinationis spe-
cies ; utpote geomantiam, idroman-
tiam , aerimantiam, piromantiam 66.
Quod autem Deucalion et uxor sua
consuluerunt deam illam et eius
monitu iactis lapidibus ex iactu viri
mares ex iactu Pirre mulieres pro-
venerunt. Non est aliud nisi quod
62. Cf. Ovidius, Metamorphoseon 1. 313-
415.
63. Cf. Servius, In Virgilii Eclogas 6. 41.
64. Cf. Ovidius , Metamorphoseon 1. 383.
65. Augustinus, De civitate Dei 8. 18 and
18. 10.
66. Cf. Isidorus 8. 9. 13.
h. ascendntes, P.
i. descendntibus, P.
k. fortasse quod pro que.
 IN SATIRAM 1.86-90
quando fuite uberior copia vitio-
rum quam hodie. Ac si diceret
<< numquam » et subiungit unum
pessimum vitium scilicet ludum
alee et avaritie, et hic est quando
patuit maior sinus avaritie, id est
cupiditatis ; autem quando avaritie
hos a<nimos > id est hanc animo-
sitatem, ut dicit Ysidorus. Quidam
miles nomine Alea in obsidione
Troie ludum invenit, qui a nomine
inventoris alea vocatur 23. Neque
enim nunc numquam habuit hos
animos quia mercem
ad casum id est ad aleam in qua
casuali actu calorum et motu tabu-
larum luditur ; lo <culis> num<o >-
23. Cf. Isidorus 18. 60.
e. fuit, W.
121
docente ratione sua viderunt quod
rudes viros et rudes mulieres qui
superfuerunt cum eis possent suis
rationibus conformare et instruere,
et de irationalibus rationales reddi-
derunt, et instruxit vir viros et
mulier mulieres.
et quando uberior quasi diceret
<< cum de viciis hominum scribere
proponam, spaciosam habeo mate-
riam quia numquam maior fuit
copia viciorum >>
quando maior avaritie due sunt :
una est cupere, cupienda et non
cupi ; altera tenere, tenenda et non
te<neri >. Hec ultima habet quod
recondat que tenet, altera non alea
quando dicit Isidorus Ethimo-
logiarum 67 quia Greci morantes in
obsidione Troie habebant aliquando
inducias cum Troianis, nec tamen
ab obsidione recedebant, quia vide-
bant si inde recederent se postea
non facile posse aggregari. Per
tam longas ergo inducias turpe erat
ociari, et adinveniebant diversa
genera ludorum. Erat autem inter
Grecos quidam Alea nomine, et ipse
ludum alearum invenit et dictus est
ludus ille ut dicit Isodorus ab
inventore Alea. Solebant autem
veteres cum aleis ludere tantum
modo causa spaciandi vel pro mini-
mis, sed in tempore Iuvenalis non
erat delectatio sed rapina cuiusdam
nec pro minimis ludebant sed pro
plena numorum arca. Quod vicium
auctor non tacet, dicens
ad casum nota quod dicit casum
quia spe lucri omnes eunt sed ali-
quis sepe fallitur cadens a spe
67. Isidorus 18. 60.
122 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
rum f plenis comitantibus luden-
tem ; tabule posita plena numeris et
quanta prelia id est ponens videre
armigero dispensatore nummorum
qui ponuntur in ludo, et hec que ibi
sunt : proelia Armigero dispen-
satore ; apparet ex verbis illius ait
in domino suo ; deinde
simplexne furor id est parvus furor
perdere sextertia centum aleis, et
non reddere tunicam servo horrenti
frigore. In hoc n<o >tat & illos
avaros in rebus honestis quis toti-
dem notat Romanos de superflui-
tate ; edific <arent > h et gulositate,
et hoc est antiquorum erexit toti-
dem villas quot erigunt, moderni
etiam quis fercula † ... † avus non
enim numerus ferculorum est culpa
sed solitudo cenantium
nunc sportula et cetera. Aliud
genus avaritie notat tale, Scilicet
mos fuit antiquorum pauperibus
scilicet facere erogationem. In
diebus statunt in cuius iudicium ;
sportula in primo limine ponebatur
ut a pauperibus videretur. Sed
moderni ad hoc avaricie devenerant,
qui nobiles et divites ad hanc
errogationem loco pauperum ibant,
et hoc est
primo limine erogantis sportula est
primo < I>imine ut scilicet corbis
f. numerum, W.
g. natat, W.
h. edificierunt, W.
i. vimine, W.
priori, et non tantum ludunt sed
etiam pugnant et hoc est
quanta prelia pugnant enim vel
omnes cum armigero, vel lusor cum
lusore. Armiger enim nummos
custodit et non vult domino dare
quantum ipse vult perdere
simplexne furor verba sunt Iuvena-
lis, vel melius armigeri ad dominum.
Sextercium pondus est duarum
librarum et dimmidie
horrenti id est frigida non reddere
tunicam vel quam meruerat servus
ab eo vel quam ei acomodaverat ad
ludendum, et ipse perdiderat quis
totidem notat superfluitatem quis
fercula hic de gulositate notat Ro-
manos Septem per hoc avariciam
notat, nam si inter multas cenas
habent septem fercula non esset
mirum sed quod de secreto ea cene-
bant hoc mirum erat, et hoc ava-
ricia cogebat avus per avum quem-
libet antecessorem accipe
nunc sportula nota quod Romani
accepta dignitate aliqua erogationes
suas faciebant, quia sic mos erat.
Sed cum ad erogationem soli pau-
peres venire deberent, veniebant et
ipsi divites ; et hoc notat sportula
dicens << sportula >> notat eos de
avaricia, quia sporta deberet esse et
magna
primo limine de magna gula eos
reprehendit, quoniam cum elemo-
 IN SATIRAM 1.90-102
eius diminutum est, sportula parva
in hoc notat avartiam erogantis
rapienda turbe togate pauper id est
pauperes enim toga induebantur et
quamvis sit ab illa rapienda ille
tamen qui erogat prius inspicit
quam det, que non est caritas, que
omnes amplectitur ; nunc ad per-
sonam respicet trepidat timore ne
venias pauper, enim quam facien-
dam nunc errogant
suppositus id est sub nomine ali-
cuius divitum et persona ; falso
nomine alicuius divitum ideo prius
agnitus hac aliquis et iubet et
erogat vocari ad erogationem
ipsos Troiugenas 24 nam id est
nobiles qui enim de progenie Troia-
norum, qui cum Enea veniunt,
nati sunt ; Troiugene vocati sunt, et
nobiles iudicati et merito vocantur
nam vexant ipsi Troiugene vexant
limen nobiscum ponunt se in nume-
ro pauperum, et hic est qui dicit
vexant notat frequentiam adinve-
nientium et vero qui erogat respicit
ad personam, quia sic ait minister
da prius pretori, deinde visok doc-
tiorum, et ignobiliori adversatur ;
sic scilicet li<bertinus >, adsum
etc qui est doctiorum et ideo « plus
da illi ». Libertus et a servitio
manu missus, libertinus filius liberti,
liber filius libertini, ingenuus secun-
dum quosdam filius liberi.
24. Cf. Scholia, p . 11.
k. viso, ut vid.
123
sine dari debent in abscondita iuxta
illud, te faciente elemosinam, nes-
ciat sinister quid faciat dextra 68 ;
ipsi ad laudem et gloriam suam
[ipsi ] ¹ in primo limine domus pone-
bant sportulam, ut viderentur ab
hominibus togate id est pauperi
quia toga pauperes utebantur
ille tamen faciem quamvis pauperes
deberent accipere, tamen ille qui
dividit inspicit ne veniant pau-
peres sed soli divites
subpositus id est sub specie alicuius
divitis agnitus accipies si sciaris
esse dives, habebis iubet a preconi
diceret aliquis « venientne divites ? »
Respondetur « sic quia divisor iubet
eos vocari »
Troiuene id est a Troianis geniti, qui
Rome nobiliores habebantur, iubet
vocari et ipsi veniunt, et hoc probat
ab effectu, dicens
nam vexant verba sunt auctoris da
pretori, da deinde tribuno verba
erogantis
sed libertinus adhuc sunt verba ero-
gantis ; sic leges « iubeo te dare
tribuno », sed prior venit libertinus,
<< cave ne accipiat ». Libertus ille
est < quis > m ex servo manu miti-
Sed tur. Libertinus filius liberti, liber
68. Matt. 6. 3-4.
1. ipsi (post suam) expunxi ; P.
m. quid, P.
124 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
Tullius dicit, numquam posse dici
ingenuum qui ex servitute descen-
dit. Deinde subiungit Iuvenalis
superbiam Libertini ex verbis
eiusdem inquit Latinus
ego assum prior et certe faceris
dubitem animo de <fendere > lo-
< cum >, ut quomodo sum prior
loco preest, † ... † ut « quamvis sum
advena sum dives ». In hoc notat
Romanum qui divitias omnibus
preo<pt >ebat¹ et hoc est
1. preonelant, W.
filius libertini 69. Et secundum
quosdam ingenuus filius liberi, sed
contra hos qui dicunt est Tullius sic
dicens : ingenuus n cuius nemo
maiorum servitute<m > servivit 70,
nec capite diminutus est ; non
potest ergo esse ingenuus qui est de
progenie servorum vel manu misso-
rum ; capitis diminutio est prioris
status immutatio. Sed tres sunt
capitis diminutiones : minor, maior,
media. Minor autem est aqu<e>
et ignis interdictio, nam multociens
cum aliquis esset reus aqua et ignis
ei interdiceba<n >tur, id est com-
munio aliorum civium, quod nos
excommunicari dicimus. Deporta-
tio vero media diminutio erat, et
erat deportatio quotiens aliquis in
exilium mitebatur cum spe < re-
deundi > P. Maior autem diminutio
relegatio erat, et erat relegatio quo-
tiens in exilium mitebatur aliquis
sine spe < redeundi > 9 ; unde de
Boetio legis quantum ipse Papie
relegatus est in exilium 71 inquit
libertinus ego adsum prior
cur timeam diceret erogans et quo-
modo audes te confiteri esse liber-
tinus, ad quod ille cur timeam ?
factis et dubitem animo defendere
locum ante tribunum quia « quam-
vis sim alienigena et de servorum
progenie, cum ego sim dives » et
hoc est
69. Cf. Isidorus 9. 4. 43-50.
70. Cicero, Ad Verrem Orationes 2. 1. 58
(Cf. Ernesti Clavis Ciceroniana [ Berlin , 1818]
<< Ingenuitas : est eorum qui liberis paren-
tibus nati sunt, quorumque nemo iustam
servitutem servivit » [p. 466]).
71. Guillaume de Conches, Glosae in Boe-
tium « in exilium Papie relegatus est.
Paris, Bibl. Nat. Lat. 14380, fol. 1r.
n. ingenuuus, P.
o. aqua P.
p. reuntendi, P.
q. Ibid.
 IN SATIRAM 1.103-106
quamvis natus ad Euphreten circa
† ... † fluvium cuiusdam patrie ;
quare hoc faceris ? quia signum et
hoc est, quamvis : id est anne esse
natum ad Eufraten. † Ar<gue-
rint> : id est comparuerunt
molles id est foramina facta in
molles partes aurium. Mos enim
orientalium erat perforare aures ad
deferendum in aures, sed tamen
quamvis fieri advena sed quos habes
Rome parant si quales
quadringenta sextertia nummorum.
Tanti enim singulis annis locabant
illas. Diceret aliquis « inde es nobi-
lis ? » Respondetur « qua cura ?,
quid valet hodie nobilitas ? » ac si
diceret « nihil » et hoc est
quid optandum id est digna optari
maior purpura id est nobiles, quia
soli maiores et nobiles solebant uti
purpura. Si habetur in libro
« maius » sic legatur « quid maius
divitiis op< tandum > ? » confert
125
quamvis natus Eufrates fluvius est
in India. Hic ponitur pro qualibet
remota patria, et per Eufratem alie-
nigenum se notat, per hoc quod sibi
vult locum defendere. Diviciis
notatur invidia, et avaricia Romano-
rum qui servis si divites essent
potius dabant et honorem confere-
bant quam nobilibus, quod scilicet
me alienigenum et de servorum pro-
genie arguerint id est probaverint
fenestre in aure fenestras aurium
vocat foramina, que servis fiebant
in auribus ad suspendendas in aures,
ut per hoc < cognoscitur > r iste
vero libertinus. Et si servus non
esset, quia tamen de servorum erat
progenie foramina habebat in auri-
bus
Molles quia non multum ledunt
facte in aure, sed in aliis membris,
si fierent, multum lederent ; vel
molles in molli parte aurium facte
sed quinque taberne ac si diceret
<< de servorum progenie sum sed
tamen dives ». Taberna est domus
in qua vinum venditur vel quelibet
domus mer <ca >torias in qua mer-
ces venduntur huius modi, autem
domus si in frequentia hominum
sunt multo locantur quadringenta
sextercia
Quid confert purpura maior per
purpuram nobiles intellige, que
vestis est nobilium, et sit sensus :
<< quid maius habent nobiles quam
ego, cum ego sim dives et reveren-
dus et ipsi pauperes et despecti ? »
r. connoscensitur, P.
s. meritoria, P.
126 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
purpuram, id est nobilitas. Sed hic
est qui custodit oves non proprias
sed quid sed deterius est. Corvinus
fuit quidam nobilis qui coactus
paupertate factus est opilio in Lau-
renti agro. Ad hunc exaggerat divi-
tias suas
ego possideo plus Pallante illo
nobili et Licinis illis nobilibus.
Expectent Hic sunt verba Iuvenalis
quandoquidem tot presidet, ergo
expectent et divitie nobilium, quod
revera faciunt
ne honori cedat locum albis habenti
sacrum honorem qui nuper pedibus
in hanc albis pulvere vel nuditate.
In hoc qui dicit nuper notat animi
advenam, in hoc qui dicit pedibus
albis ignobilem et pauperem, dum
subiungit quare debet etiam vincere
divitie
quandoquidem maiestas <etc>
ponit se in numero avarorum ut
liberius reprehendat . <Sed > m
non est sanctissima maiestas divi-
tiarum quia non colitur pecunia ut
dea autem, immo plusquam Deus et
hoc est, et si id est quamvis
m. d, cod.
Laurens opidum erat iuxta Roman,
et Romani nobiles qui ad tantam
devenerant paupertatem quod, pre
pudore, in urbe remanere non pote-
rant illuc ibant et fiebant opiliones.
Corvinus nobilis quidam fuerat qui
sic ibi oves servabat non suas, sed
conductas ut ita sibi victum adqui-
reret
ego possideo plus adhuc sunt verba
libertini de diviciis se iactantis.
Pallas nomen cuiusdam nobilis.
Licinii fuerunt nobiles Romani.
expectent ergo tribuni Quandoqui-
dem ignobiles divicias possident
nobiles autem non, ergo expectet
pauper nobilis, et prior accipiat
ignobilis. Verba sunt auctoris iro-
nice dicta vel sunt verba libertini
ne honori cedit sacro secundum
utramque sententiam hoc lege sacra
ne id est sacre nobilitati que debe-
ret honorari albis id est nudis, vel
pulverulentis, vel quia servi ute-
bantur sotularibus albis ad discre-
tionem nobilium 72
quandoquidem non cedat, dico,
servus dives pauperi nobili, quan-
doquidem inter nos divicie in
veneratione habuntur ut sacro-
sa<n >cta v73. Magestas est dicto-
rum factorumve existimatio propter
quam post veneranda sit etsi funesta
pecunia sanctisima, dico, est maies-
tas diviciarum quamvis adhuc non
sit factum templum sancte pecunie,
sicut factum est paci, < fidei > w,
et aliis virtutibus
72. Cf. Scholia, p . 12.
73. Ibid.
t. commonly spelled subtalaribus.
v. sacrosacta, P.
w. fidere, P.
 IN SATIRAM 1.106-120 127

Nummorum ei ereximus nullas id

est illius vel more deorum ac si
diceret << plus colimus pecuniam
extra templum quam Deum in tem-
plo, » ut id est sicut solitur pax
fides etc nomina sunt deorum et
concordia illa que crepitat salutato
attribuit Concordie que est avis,
sibi delicare ", id est ciconie. Dicunt
enim phisici « qui quoque venit ad
nidum pro salutatione pullorum
crepitat, crepitat rostro < quod > •
est signum amicitie ».
queque salutato ciconia est avis que
dedicata est concordie quia pacem
diligit et concordiam. Unde et ut
nidificat non rapit quicquam licet
famelica, et rediens ad nidum in
signum salutatonis nidi et loci cre-
pitat rostro. Auctor ergo ipsi dee
atribuit quod avis est

G.c. 25 << divites sic vadunt ad ero-

gationem sportule >>

sed cum summus honor habens
summum honorem finito anno
quando divites ponunt rationem
cum servis suis computet quid
referat id est quid valuerit per
annum ; et quantum addat ratio , id
est computationibus . Quid faciet
modo ?
comites mei, id est pauperes quibus
hinc de erogatione sportule toga
vestimentum ; calceus id est calcia P
vita panis et fumus domi ignis com-
plementum
sed cum summus honor Ita Rome
communiter nobiles querunt elemo-
sinas et finito anno computant quid
acceperint ab elemosina ; quid ergo
facient miseri, quorum spes pendet
ex erogationibus ? Ac si diceret
<< fame morientur >» . Sportula est
vas virgeum in quo ponuntur ele-
mosine
comites mei pauperes sicut ego

densissima etc et non soli viri ad densissima Romanorum mordet

sportulam vadunt sed uxores suas avaritiam qui languidas uxores cum
secum ducunt densissima lectica non possent ire in lecticis ad bene-
<etc > per lecticam, que est currus ficium deferebant
matronarum, intelligit matronas ;
deinde exponit hoc : Et vix sequi-
turque maritum <etc > in hoc
exaggerat eorum avaritiam qui

25. G. c. ut vid., conieci hoc esse

G<ulielmus > <de > C <onchis >.

n. dedicare (?), conieci.

o. qui, W.
p. calcia, lectio incerta.
128 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
debilitati uxoris non patiunt et
circumducitur per totam civitatem,
et hic alter cum sua uxor nec ire
nec circumduci potest
petit enim absenti id est ad opus
uxoris absentis tamquam presentis
iam
callidus arte decipiendi
ostendens sellam id est currum
vacuam et clausam pro quo sic
dicens
Galla mea uxor et in < curru > r
ista dimitte eam abire dando aliquid
moraris vel interrogando vel affir-
mando possit > legi, tunc qui
erogat timens decipi, sic o Galla
profer caput ut te videam, tunc ait
dicens noli illam vexare vocando
quiescit id est dormit
ipse aliud reprehendit in Romanis
scilicet ordinem vite cotidiane, quia
singulis diebus < que > prius
debebant petere, petebant < poste-
rius >tet e converso. Quis autem
debeat esse ordo ille superius des-
cripsimus, vel hic non curamus
iterum scribere, sed inde hic peta-
tur et hoc est :
dies pulcro rerum hironice ac si
diceret, non deinde subiungit abu-
sionem ordinis
q. patiunt, lectio incerta.
r. curia, W.
s. qui, W.
t. preteritus (?), W.
languida <lan >guitudine *
• hic petit absenti hic iterum notat
avaritiam quia ducebant currus
vacuos et clausos ne quis posset
introspicere, et petebant uxoribus
elemosinas, fingentes intus esse cum
non esset iam calidus arte assue-
factus mendaciis
profer Galla caput Verba erogantis
cicius dimite id est da cito ut eam
dormi reducas quia non est sana
moraris interrogando vel affirman-
do ;
noli vexare verba petentis
ipse dies hic notat vicia Romano-
rum in perversione ordinis vivendi
et institutionis maiorum. Ordina-
tionem vite Romanorum super hunc
versum << exul ab octava » expo-
suimus ; hic tantum atende quod
perverse agebant
pulcro ordine quasi diceret pulcrum
ordinem habunt modo Romani ;
yronice dicit
x. guitudine, P.
 IN SATIRAM 1.122-131
sportula erogare, cuius signum est
sportula. Petitur qui deberet et
posterior peti deinde forum ad
tractandas causas Apollo peritus
iurisque quia in eius templo doce-
bantur leges et iura
triumphales imagines quibus depicti
erant triumphi antiquorum, que pri-
mo debuissent † ... <pe >ti ; † Vv se-
cundum hoc superius ostendimus
inter quas triumphales imagines et
ausus habere suo<s > titulos id est
imagines nescio quis an sit Egyp-
<tius> an Arabicus> 26. Hoc
dicit de Crispino qui fuit de Egyp-
tio patre et Arabica matre, et nota
< quod > w nimis mordaciter dixit
Arabarces, id est princeps Arabie.
Archos scilicet princeps est sed ne
propter illius proprietatem vide-
retur iuste ibi posit<us > y, subiun-
git
cuius tantum ad effigiem etc. si
etiam cacare
26. Cf. Cicero Atticae 2. 17. 3 referring
to Pompey (Arabarches).
v. peti (et prior) illegibile.
w. qui, W.
x. illius (post illius) expunxi.
y. posita, W.
129
triumphales 74 quotiens << trium-
phales » per se ponitur, debet accipi
pro trimphalibus imaginebus. Ima-
gines triumphales erant imag<i-
nes> triumphalium virorum, quas
pro triumphis meruerunt. Arcus ut
prediximus ubi facta erant digna
relatu.
Triumphales ergo cum per se poni-
tur et pro ima<ginibus > et pro
arcubus accipitur- hic vero pro
imaginibus ; unde sequitur
inter quas titulos id est imagines
Egiptius natus patre Egiptio
Arabarches id est prince<p >s Ara-
bie 75. Archos enim princeps y :
yronia est, quia mater sua de Archa-
dia fuerat ; in hoc ergo quod patre
Egiptio et matre Arabica innuit
eum alienigenam. Notat et « no-
thum >> cum pat<er > z eius et
mater se non cognovissent ; iste
vero quem sic notat Crispinus est
ad effigiem dixerat eum habere
imaginem in numero triumphalium ;
modo dicit quod ad eius imaginem
non tantum mingendum erat sed
etiam cacandum
74. Cf. see H. Furneaux's notes to Taci-
tus Annales 1. 72 ( Oxford : Oxford University
Press, 1887) (Tacitus was not much known
in the twelfh century, but it illustrates
use of triumphalia).
75. Cf. Scholia, p. 14.
y. princes, P.
z. patre, P.
130 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
vestibulis aliud vitium notat in Ro-
manis : avaritiam in aliis, gulosi-
tatem in se abeunt veteres quia nec
etiam in vestibulo domus posses
remanere. Vestibulum dicitur por-
ticus domus a < veste > z vestis
quia tegit et vestit domum, vel a
Vesta dea quia primo in templo
Veste factum est, vel secundum
suum compositum est a « ve » et
<< statu , » et est vestibulum sine
statu quia ibi non remanent ingre-
dientes sed transeunt ad interiora
† < quia > ... † a ponitur pro « sine »,
habemus inde multis modis ut
veteres sine corde
se deponunt vo<ta > imprecantes
ipsi domino vel deponunt vota id est
desideria, quia desinunt desiderare
scientes se pro nichilo desiderare.
Diceret aliquis « ideo abeunt de
vestibulis quia numquam sperave-
runt se cenaturos ; » ideo respondit
quod diu speraverunt ; et hoc est
quamquam homini esurienti sed et
ponit singulare pro plurali ; et ideo
spes cene id est diceret aliquis « non
est avaricia hic < quod > b nichil
datur eis sed ex paupertate ; » ideo
subiungit
z. vestie, W.
a. qui a (?), W.
b. qui, W.
vestibulis abeunt In alio notat
avariciam Romanorum quia scilicet
hora prandii expellebant servientes
a domibus suis et non tantum a
domibus sed etiam a vestibulis.
Vestibulum dicitur porticus domus
quia vestit et decorat domum ; vel
vestibulum quasi sine statione dici-
tur, et est compositum a « ve » et
<< sto statum » quia scilicet ibi non
statur sed ad anteriora domus
transitur veteres lassique maximam
ostendit avariciam quia si alii expel-
lerentur saltem veteres et lassi
admitendi erant
votaque deponunt id est desideria
dimitunt quia cenam ante desider-
arent horam prandii, iam non
desiderant videntes se decidisse a
spe sua vel aliter deponunt vota id
est maledicendi desideria, et im-
precantur domino
quamquam longissima sic leges :
expellit dicens clientes hora in cene,
quamvis etiam videat eam posse
sufficere et sibi et servientibus, et
hoc dicit equipollentum sic quam-
quam sit homini id est domino
longissima spes cene quod ipse
scilicet speret eam longe posse
sufficere et sibi et illis tamen eos
expellit vel aliter cliens deponit,
depulsus, desideria cene
quamvis longissima etc scilicet
quamvis diu expectasset et sperasset
cenaturum caules quasi diceret « et
quid faciunt expulsi famuli ? »
Emunt caules et ignem ad coquen-
dos caules ; illud tantillum
 IN SATIRAM 1.132-138
interea rex horum id est clientum,
dicens vora<bat >. Etiam hic notat
gulositatem illius
optima silvarum quantum ad carnes
et pare quantum ad pisces ipse tan-
tum id est solus iam
thoris vacuis non in quo iacebat
sed in quo alii debent discumbere.
Mos enim fuit antiquorum in cena-
culis suis tres thoros habere : in
uno discumbebat dicens cum uxore
et liberis, et in secundo hospites, in
tertio servi et ancille. Unde cena-
culum vel † cen ... † с a tribus lectis
dicitur triclinium 7" ; clunium enim
est lectus inde † ... † d ponitur archi-
triclinus, id est princeps cenaculi
vel convivii. Iste vere sine hospi-
cibus et servis cenabat et sic erant
duo thori vacui
nam de thori sunt vacui quia unica
est mensa, quia si omnes thori
essent pleni tres essent mense, et
hoc est nam de tot orbibus id est
rotundis mensis et pu < lchris >,
id est qualitate, cum habent tot
et tales orbes
tot patrimonia tota, < quod >
gulos <us > est ; mensa et ea,
27. Cf. Isidorus 15. 3. 8.
c. cen... illegibile.
d. post inde illegibile.
e. qui, W.
f. gulosum, W.
131
optima ita famuli et dicens ; interea
pascet se deliciosis prandiis, vena-
tionibus, et piscibus ; nota quod
dicit vorabit ut magnam exprimam
gulositatem vacuis toris consueve-
rant antiqui habere in domibus suis
tres lectos, quia non nisi concum-
bendo comedebant, et in primo
thoro dicens cum uxore et filiis
comedebat, in secundo hospites,
in tercio famuli. Vocabant quia
huius modi lectos triclinia unde
architiclinus princeps triclinii 76.
Per hoc ergo quod dicit hunc iacere
in vacuis toris notat eum de avaricia
qui non hospites admitebat, et
clientes expellebat
nam de tot diceret aliquis «< non est
verisimile quod dicis ' ego in domi-
bus eorum video tantas pulcras
mensas et tam bene dispositas, ' ac
si cotidie multa familia ibi conve-
niret. » Ad hoc dicit <« quamvis hoc
sit non est iccirco minus verum
quod dico, quia non assident mensis
illis . » Imo secreto quadam par-
vula mensa devorant ea que a pre-
cessoribus eis relicta sunt ; et hoc
est nam de tot vere toris vacuis
comedebant nam de tot orbibus
orbes intellige rotundas mensas, et
tam antiquis quia ab antecessoribus
non ab ipsis constructis
patrimonia non aliquid quod ipsi
probitate sua adquisierinta, sed que
76. Cf. Isidorus 15. 3. 8.
a. fortasse adquisiverunt.
132 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
< quod > & est avarus, et sic qui
nullus parasitus id est oculator ibri
erat, sed
qui ferat istas luxurie id est luxurias
sordidas ac si diceret « nullus » et
quanta gula id est gulositas
que sibi propter se ponit apros
sibi < etc propter multitudinem
... th dentium
pena etc quamvis hominibus homi-
nes non accipiant vindictam de
gulositate, Natura tamen accipiunt.
Hec est pena : est p <resens >
gulositas, et subiungit qua scilicet
cum etc id est † inf<es > tatur † i
cibo deponis amictus et pavonem
< etc > pavo est crudus, id est indi-
gestabilis ; tantum enim est dura
illius caro < quod > k per ix dies
non potest homo < illam >¹ diri-
gere, et nota quandoquidem hoc
dicit << de balneo » physicum est.
Intrare balneum post cibum peri-
culosum est, calor enim aperit poros
humani corporis, quibus apertis m
< evaporabat > n naturalis calor.
Quo minuto non potest cibus bene
decoqui, inde generantur crudi
humores qui sunt causa mortis vel
magnarum infirmitatum, et maxime
cibus indigestabilis est ut hinc qui
turgidus pavone intrat balnea
g. qui, W.
h. ante dentium illegibile.
i. infestatur conieci.
k. que, W.
1. illud, W. W means digerere but uses
dirigere.
m. apertum (?), W.
n. evorat, W.
patres eis reliquerunt nullus iam
Euformes notat eos qui etiam lec-
catores vetabant as se ingredi hora
cene sed
quis ferat cumb tot et tanta sint
vicia, quis posset ea pati ?
quanta est gula maxime reprehendit
eos de gulositate qui sibi aprum
integrum aponebant. Aprum dicit
potius quam aliud animal ad
augmentum gulositatis, quia aper
maximum est animal, et quod mul-
tis posset sufficere, unde suddit
animal
propter pena tamen sic et sic
agunt et non puniuntur ab homi-
nibus sed ultio divina punit eos, et
pena tali quam operatur physica
rerum. Quomodo subdit cum tur-
gidus id est refectus cibis deponis
amictus in balnea nota quod
multum delectant , quamquam ergo
satis indulxerant gule ad maiorem
delectationem. Intrabant turgidi
balnea ; cibus, vero quo refecti
erant, indigestus erat, ex calore
aperiebantur pori et evaporabat
calor interior. Nec poterat deqoqui
cibus inde nascuntur crudi humores
et indigesti qui opilabant arterias id
est vias spiritus, et suffocatur cor
opressum illis cibis et crudis humo-
ribus, quia non poterant aer<em > <
atrahere ad contemperandum natu-
ralem calorem . Meatibus iam
obstructis et, inde subite mortes
contingent Dei permissione , et phi-
sica tamen operante
b con, P.
c. aera, P, incertum.
 IN SATIRAM 1.139-147
subite senectus mortes preoccupata
non potest facere testamentum et
eo mortuo
idem funus id est < rumor > • de
subita eius morte nova nec quia a
nullo propter eius gulositatem deli-
gitur per cunctas in quibus sunt
conventus hominum
ducitur funus mortui ; plau <den-
dum > id est dignum quo plaudant
homines, amicis tamen P iratis na-
tura ; et cum sint vitia
non erit ulterius amplius quod
posteritas id est sequens etas addat
moribus id est non enim potest
o. iunior, W.
p. tamen, incertum .
133
pavonem crudum id est indegesti-
bilem, quia ut testatur phisica, adeo
indigestibilis est pavo quod ante
novem dies non potuit eniti natura
digerere, et per pavonem quoslibet
cibos indigestos accipe
hinc subite mortes ex superfluitate
ciborum indigestorum atque intes-
tata senectus intestata est quando
aliquis preoccupatus morte moritur
absque testamento
it nova ita ille avarus et gulosus
tulitu<r> d, moritur et fere de
morte eius nemo dolet nova quia
ita non solent homines mori
ducitur funus id est mortuus.
Ad tumulum effertur funus ; dico
ducitur iratis quidam libri habent
plangendum, quidam plaudendum,
sic ergo leges plaudendum quamvis
inde amici eius sint irati potius inde
deberent gaudere ; vel plangendum
manibus. Quonium in funeribus
amici manibus plangebant antiqui
et si pauci essent conducebant
vicinos ut una plangerent. Sed si
plangendum ibi legas yronice dic-
tum intellige, vel plangendum dicit
propter cantus quia antiqui canta-
bant in funeribus mortuorum, quia
anima composita est musicis
consonantis, teste Platone. Rece-
dens a corpore musicis delectatur
consonantiis, quia similia plaudent
similibus 77
non erit ulterius diceret aliquis
<< adhuc deberes expectare quan-
tum ? Adhuc maior copia viciorum
77. Guillaume de Conches, In Platonem
(Timeus 35 B), pp . 155-56.
d. tulitum, P.
134 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
novum vicium inveniri, sed ne ideo
videretur a < potestate > Cesar-
<is > q, addit
minores id est futuri et si non
inveniant nova potestata ulterius
que faciunt hodie alii
et sic ac vitium in precipiti quia
non potest plus accendere et ideo
cum satira
velis totos pande sinus met-
haforice hoc dicit
dicas ipse Iuvenalis facit questionem
que sibi posset ab aliquo fieri, sic
for<sitan > dicas etc querendo hic
in hoc loco
unde est sibi materie id est scientia
par id est sufficiens, tante materie
ingenium est naturalis vis aliquid
cito intelligendum. Dictum inge-
nium quasi intus genitum 28. Sine
hoc teste horum potest scribi, sed
quia multi habent scientiam suffi-
cientem reprehendendi non tam
28. Cf. Cicero, De oratore 1. 25. 113
« Celeres ingenii motus » ; Apuleius, De
platone et eius dogmate 2. 3 ; and John of
Salisbury, Metalogicon 1. 4 ed. G. G. C. Webb
(Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1929).
q. potestatis Cesare, W.
erit ? » Adhuc respondetur quod
non,
eadem facient que maiores fecerunt
et minores facient a modo, quia non
est quod possint addere, et in hoc
notat late patere viciorum profun-
ditatem
omne in precipiti id est in summo ;
precipiti ponit pro summo nam
cum natura temporalium sit semper
mutari et variari ex quo ad sum-
mum perveniunt, oportet secundum
naturam temporalium precipicium
expectes, id est casum . Unde
Bo<etius>78 De Consolatione pros-
peram fortunam vocat fallacem,
adversam, promtam et instruentem
nos, ut post adversa speramus
prospera
utere velis o satira
dicas hic forsitan hortabatur Iuve-
nalis satiram ut reprehenderet
omnes, sed ei posset obici : «< unde
erit tibi ingenium quo omnia ista
notare possis ? vel unde erit tibi
tanta libertas ut quicquam velis de
quolibet dicas ? » Hanc ergo objec-
tionem ponit par materie ut sufficiat
ad ex < s > equendam materiam
78. Boethius, De consolatione philoso-
phia 2. 8.
 IN SATIRAM 1.148-155
audent reprehendere quia non ha-
bent libertatem. Subiungit unde
illa scilicet libertas prius sed scri-
bendi
quodcumque flagrante ira vel indi-
gnatione. Priores enim vitia quo-
rumlibet reprehendebant, sed modo
moderni non in hoc notat illos
impacientes correptionis, sed quia
inusitato nomine libertatem voca-
verit, simplicitatem addet cuius
libertatis
non audeo : non quia nullus in
tempore Neronis audebat se pro-
fiteri liberum, omnes enim liberos
occidebat
quid refert diceret aliquis << secure
potes reprehendere saltem pau-
peres. » Respondetur « de hoc non
curo sed divites timeo, » et hic dicit
loquendo, quasi alii sic refert id est
quis prodest sinu ? Ille pauper
ignoscat dictis an non, ac si diceret
† << ane >> † Secure potest neglegi
ira pauperis, sed
pone Tigellinum illum divitem in
tua sa<tira >
lucebis illa etc > Nero adinvenit
huius modi tormentum. Ponebant
paulum inferiora, per OS
per inferiora,
exiret quo accenso moriebatur.
r. post diceret - illegibile.
135
unde priorum quasi diceret << si
etiam esset ingenium non quod
sufficeret ad ex<s >equendum quod
affectas >> Unde libertas priorum
id est quam priores habuerunt
scribendi quodcumque < etc > id
est reprehendendi quecumque velis
flagrante id est indignante. Sed
cum debuit dicere « libertas » dixit
simplicitas, quia Nero adeo inpu-
gnabat libertatem, quod nemo tunc
temporis ausus erat eum nominare,
unde suddit
cuius non audeo bene tamen posuit
simplicitatem pro libertate, quia
liberi simplices sunt et sine impli-
catione servitutis.
Quid refert posset dicere aliquis
<< scribat Iuvenalis et dicat quod
volet ? saltem pauperes igno-
<s >cente ei de maledictis »> ; ad
hoc ille < sibilat >f ; dicit quid
refert id est quis prodest, O Iuve-
nalis ? An Mutius ille pauper
Romanus ignoscat etc quod dicit
nihil
pone Tigellinum 79 vere nihil prodest
si pauperes ignoscant quia si male
loqueris de divitibus plecteris ; per
Tigel<lunum > quemlibet divitem
accipe teda lucebis in illa notat
penam a Nerone inventam 80 ; tor-
quebat enim ita homines quod palo
infixo per posteriora et per medium
79. Cf. Suetonius Vita Galbae 15 and
Tacitus Annales 14. 48. Tigellinus was a
favorite of Nero.
80. Scholia, p. 16.
e. ignocent, P.
f. sibimet, P.
136 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
Hoc tormentum vocat hic teda,
et dum < ponitur > teda cum
+ hare < na > †
harena tamen sulcum deducit
palo urente † <ter>ramque t et latum media vel sit aliud genus
† ded<ucit> † , ergo quandoquidem
mortifer est, divitem reprehendit
ergo ille qui venena tribus patruis
id est doctoribus ; scilicet Nero qui
tres magistros suos occidit
vehatur pensilibus in culcitra que
pendet in curru suo ; dum Cerberus
ab Hercle de tenebris inferorum ad
lucem trahitur, visa luce vomuit
super cotes, unde nate † h ….. e † 29
venenose dicte a conita, quasi a
cotibus nata. Huius fabule hec est
veritas : Cerberus est terra dicta
Cerberus quasi corboros, id est
vorans carnes 30, terras enim carnes
mortuas putredine devorat, sed ossa
non tam cito 31. Unde dicitur in
29. post nate illegibile.
30. Cf. Isidorus 10. 3. 33.
31. Cf. Mythographus 2. 149-50.
s. terita (?), W, pro terra.
gutteris, faciebat palum incendi, et
huius pene erat inventor 81. Postea
vero t ... iam fere crematus esset
homo. Per harenam faciebat equis
eum distrahi. Unde dicitur
pene, quod hic determinat dicendo
et latum media.
qui dedit ergo tribus quandoquidem
non possumus reprehendere nobiles
et divites sine pena ergo dicebat
a modo quicquid voluerint et
faciant, et hic notat Neronem qui
tres magistrorum suorum veneficiis
peremit. De Seneca sciunt omnes ;
similiter et alios duos perdidit.
Ponit patruis pro magistris quo-
niam Romani iusti tuerant quod
nisi patrui docerant pueros. Nam
si patres eorum docerent nimis eis
indulgent, si autem extranei nimis
asperi essent ; eligerunt ergo pa-
truos ad puerorum eruditionem qui
nec nimium indulgerent nec nimis
essent asperi
aconita sunt venena quasi a cote
id est a caute nata, quia respicit ad
fabulam 82. Cum enim Hercules
descendisset ad inferos, Cerberum
inde extraxit qui cum vidisset lucem
vomuit super lapidem et ex eius
vomitu nata sunt aconita. Hic
autem pro quolibet veneno & acci-
piuntur aconita pensilibus plumis id
est curru pulvinaribus circumdato,
que ibi pendit in curru vel pensi-
libus id est levibus
81. For taeda as instrument of punish-
ment, see also Lucretius De rerum natura
3. 1017.
82. Mythographus 1. 57.
g. venero , ut vid.
 IN SATIRAM 1.157-162 137

fabulis 32 ossa inde se habere, unde Statius : iam sparsa solo turbaverat
ossa 33. Hic dicitur tria capita habere propter tres partes terre, id est
Asiam, Affricam, Europam. Hercules vero dicitur quislibet sapiens dictus
Hercles, hercleas, id est gloriosus in lite, her quia est lis, cleos gloria lite.
Vero id est adversitate probatur sapiens non dificienda. Hercules ergo
Cerberum de inferis trahit sed Cerberus tractat ab Hercule, vomit quia
cognita sapientia mundanus homo omnia temporalia expellit, sed eis que
nascuntur venena nascunt, quia temporalia que ab istis postponuntur aliis
sunt causa mortis et anime. Et nota quod patruus ponitur per magistros,
antiqui enim patruos eligebant doctores filiis suis 34, quia qui sunt super
patruos nimis tenere diligunt nec sustinent pueros vapulari, qui ubi sunt
infra < nimis > t tepide illos diligunt, et curam de eis postponunt. Atque
illic id est de curro suo despiciat nos in hoc notat imprudentiam quia
cum sit pessimus, tum melior esse despiciat et cetera iste ve<hatur >
... bibus tibi 35

cum veniet id est cum Nero veniet

contra labellum digito id est tace,
accusator : << Non tacebo quia ve-
rum dicam. » Respondetur « immo
ideo tace, quia ideo plus accusa-
beris » et hoc est, erit accusator
<< dicas Neroni de re, hic est qui »>
dixerit verum ac si dicat « hic est
qui iactat se verum de nobis, nos
reprehendendo »
contra te. Verba auctoris ad se vel
ad quemlibet satiricum
accusator diceret satiricus aliquis
ad Iuvenalem « quare iubes me et
compescere labellum ? Ego non
dicam nisi verum. » Ad hoc dicit
<< et ob hoc ipsum plecteris, quoniam
accusator erit qui dicat « ostendo
te imperatori. » Hic est qui dixerit
verum

Securus et quandoquidem << tanta Securus quandoquidem diceret sati-

pena sequitur si reprehenderis vivos
ergo mortuos reprehende, » quia O,
Iuvenalis hec dicit sibi sub persona
alterius
ricus « de his que video non audeo
loqui . De quibus loquar ? » Ad
hoc Iuvenalis « de mortuis scribe
quia de ipsis solis secure potes scri-
bere >>

licet qui securus et satire tue securus licet commitas id est cre-
das tractui tuo

et Rutulum id est Turnum † ... † v Rutulum Turnum percussus id est

qui mortui sunt, et Achillem quia reprehensus

32. et seq. ms. W solum.

33. Statius, Thebaidos 2. 29.
34. Cf. Cicero, Pro Caelio, 11. 25 <« pertristis quidam patruus, censor, magister ».
35. Mythographus 3. 6. 22 ; 3. 13. 1 ; Fulgentius, Mythologiae 1. 5.
t. munis, W.
v. post Turnum illegibile.
138 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
Achilles reprehensus nulli est gravis
nullus irascitu < r > w si Achillem
reprehenderet. Et in hoc notat
Romanos qui aliorum reprehensio-
nem negligebant et patiebantur
suam non ; cum bonus homo, tan-
tum aliena bona querem et mala
subtrahere quantum sua, et nulla est
gravis
Hiani et secutus urnam Hilas fuit
amasius Herculis vel filius secun-
dum quosdam 36, qui cum iret cum
Hercule et Iasone et † Th<iphys > +
propter aureum vellus. In quadam
insula querens aquam dulcem cum
urna ad puteum in quo cum urna
decidit, unde a nimphis dicitur
raptus. Nimpha enim dicitur quasi
limpha mutata 1 in n. Hic Hilas
diu est ab Hercule quesitus et est
histeron prosteron, inde conversus
ordo, prius est enim urnam secutus,
postea quesitus
ense etc probat argumentum a
signo. Qui Romani sunt impatien-
tes correptionis quia quando au-
diunt satiras Lucilii pre ira rubunt
quia in se cognoscunt vicia que ille
reprehendit. Et hoc est quotiens
Lucilius reprehendenda vitia velut
ense quo resecet > vitia repre-
hendendo
36. Cf. Servius, In Virgilii Eclogam 4. 34.
w. irascitum, W.
x. resectet, W.
Hilas puer erat Herculis multum ab
eo dilectus 83, et cum iret ille Her-
cules cum Iasone propter aureum
vellus, quadam die misit puerum
suum Hilam quesitum aquam. Ille
vero dum iret raptus est a nimphis ;
Hercules videns quia non redibat
multum quesivit eum, et hoc est
quod auctor h tangit urnamque se-
cutus Tangit veritatem rei 84, quia
in rei veritate ille Hilas a nimphis
raptus non fuit. Sed querens
aquas invenit puteum, et cum
dimi<t >ereti urnam in puteum
decidit urna. Puer vero volens
retinere inclinavit se post urnam
et in puteum decidit
ense velut Per exemplum Lucilii
ostendit se abstinere debere a
viciorum reprehensione. Lucilius
scritor fuit satirarum ; quotiens
vero legebantur eius scripta, accen-
debantur auditores ad iram, scientes
se laborare viciis que audie-
bant reprehendi . Quod tangens,
auctor ostendit stultum esse repre-
hendere viv<o >sk, quia reprehensi
accenduntur ira, et satis cito irrue-
rent in reprehensione ardens ex ira
contra vicia stricto ense nudato
ense, quotiens si aliquem repre-
hendit et laxat frena satire
83. Cf. Servius, In Virgilii Eclogam 6. 43.
84. Cf. Mythographus 2. 199.
h. actor, P.
i. dimideret, P.
k. vivas, P.
 IN SATIRAM 1.163-169
rubet auditor pre pudore, et su-
biungit quis inde rubeat
cuius est mens frigida cum qua ille
notat ; mens dicitur frigida crimi-
nibus quia crimina extingunt ardo-
rem caritatis
sudant precordia auditoris culpa
quia continent similiter reprehendi
inde et ira animi et lacrime
corporis, quia iram concipiunt
animo, lacrimis manifestant lacrime
audito consilio Iuvenalis scilicet,
< quod > y periculosum est repre-
hendere vivos, securum mortuos ;
dicit sibi qui alii vero o Iuve-
nalis ? » prius voluta in animo deli-
berando inde ante
tubas id est antequam incipias
reprehendere quia
galeatum sero penitet duelli id est
postquam aliquis est galeatus tarde
sequitur penitentia belli , id est post-
quam reprehenderis, tarde penitebit
vel si habitur in libro animante, id
est excitante ad prelium < ibid >
hic non mutatur
y. qui, W.
139
auditor id est pre pudore, quia san-
guis amicus vere coopturus pudo-
rem vel delictum ; tendit ad exte-
riora
cui frigida mens est id est propter
crimina, que audit reprehendi cum¹
illis laboret. Nota quod dicit fri-
gida quia secessit sanguis qui
calidus est ad exteriora et non est
tantus calor in minoribus quantus
prius erat, absentia sanguinis id
operante
sudant precordia quamvis tacita
quoniam nemo salutat eum quem
crimina da<m >nant m
inde ex reprehensionibus ire et
lacrime id est dolores et ponit effec-
tum pro causa tecum prius ergo hic
dat consilium quandoquidem tot
mala possunt sequi ex viciorum
reprehensione. « Ergo tu Iuvenalis
inspice quod dicas quandoque inci-
pias ; nec dicas quod te peniteat
dixisse. >> Et hoc est ergo voluta
tecum hec que prediximus
animo ante tubas quidam libri
habent animante tubas, lege secun-
dum utramque literam ; secundum
primam sic : << Dico ut volutes
tecum hec antequam dicere inci-
pias, quia post inceptum tarde face-
res » et hoc per quoddam simile
dicit sic galeatum sero duelli penitet
tuba animante ad bellum uel ulti-
mam, ita voluta hec tecum < etc >
antequam tube incitent ad bellum.
Tractum est ab illo quod antequam
incipias aliquid dicere galeatum
etc ; hoc non movitur
1. con, P.
m. dagnant, P.
140 IN SATIRAM 1.170-171
experiar hic dicit Iuvenalis ex per-
sona sui. Quandoquidem pericu-
losum est reprehendere vivos, et
securus mortuos reprehendem, et
hoc est ex reprehendendo, que
cri<mina > in illis, id est contra
illos, per hos mortuos enim signat.
Experiar verba sunt Iuvenalis res-
pondentis « quandoquidem consi-
lium est mihi abstinere a reprehen-
sione viciorum , ergo loquor de mor-
tuis >> Et hoc dicit equipollentum
ita experiar quid concedatur in illos
etc Flami< nia > vicus est Rome
Latina alius vicus et in his erant
sepulcre < sic > mortuorum.
 < GLOSAE IN IUVENALIS SATIRAM SECUNDAM >

Ultra Sauromatas 85 In hac satira reprehendit eos Iuvenalis qui mentientes

religionem, sub specie religionis alios reprehendunt cum ipsi vivant
peiores reprehensis. Talium autem in tempore suo quedam secta erat
Rome que dicebatur secta Stoicorum. In hos ergo in hac satira invehitur
Iuvenalis et bene se compensat eis pro merito, dicens sic ultra Sauromatas
Sauromate sunt populi versus frigidam Ionam glacialem sub frigida Iona ;
mare est induratum in glaciem propter nimiam solis remotionem hinc id
est a Roma. In libro itaque dicit se a loco ameno ad locum inamenum
et indelectabilem velle fugere ; notat et huius modi ipocritas gravissime
pati, et consimiles non nisi pravo animo tolerandos esse quotiens istud
quotiens causale est audent de moribus id est audent reprehendere aliorum
mores, illi qui simulant se Curios nobiles et religiosos quemadmodum
fuerunt Curii illi nobiles Romani, et vivunt Bacanalia id est bacanaliter ;
id est insane baccare, enim insanire est et dicitur a Baco qui quamdam
insaniam ultra modum < sumpsit > ", non tabum hominum ingerit indocti
primum illud primum dico, quod ipsi sunt indocti quamquam velint videri
sapientes. Et hoc equipollentum invenias plena gipso Crispus fuit quidam
de secta Stoicorum magister, et summus inter alios, qui ad honorem
sui discipulos suos in armariis suis iussit habere immaginem suam, non
argentam vel auream sed de gipso, id est de terra tenaci . Et magni
habebatur apud illos et pro sapientia reputabatur habere apud se imagines
reconditas Pherorum nam perfectissimus quasi diceret « quid inde si
imagine Crispi omnia sunt plena ? » Ad hoc dicit quod ob hoc < indi-
cuntur > sibi sapientes 8. Aristotelen id est imaginem Aristotilis Picta-
con id est imaginem Pitaci, illius poete et qui iubet Cleanthas archetypos id
est imagines Cloanthum , illorum summorum magistrorum 87. Archos prin-
ceps, inde archetipos ; vocat illos Cloanthas quia principatum obtinue-
rant inter alios magistros, et etiam imagines eorum prime et summe
habebantur pluteum id est scriptorium secundum quosdam, vel est domus

85. Hae glosae in versus 2. 1-64 solae in ms. P inveniuntur.

86. Cf. Scholia, p . 18.
87. Cf. Sidonius, Epistola 9. 9. 14.
n. sumptus P.
o. indicitur, P.
142 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

camerata. Est ergo sensus et qui habet imagines Cloanthum est perfec-
tissimus frontis diceret aliquis « nihil est quod dicis ; ipsi adeo simplicem
vultum habent. >> Ad hoc dicit « ne credas fronti eorum : quantum
similes sunt sepulcris dealbatis 88, aliud habentes in corde aliud in fronte. »
quis enim vere non est credendum fronti quia ubique vides simplices
inmundos, obcenis in actu, tristibus in vultu. Castigas hic convertitur
Iuvenalis ad quemdam illorum dicens castigas tu turpia facta aliorum cum
potius reprehendi debeas, et hoc est cum sis notissima fossa fossa est in
quam confluunt inmundicie domus. Vocat igitur illum fossam, id est
immundissimum viciorum receptaculum. Cinos est canis unde cinedos
Socraticos ; vocat reprehensores discipulos Socratis hac similitudine, quia
quemadmodum canis, vel quandoque, acrius mordet reprehensor. hispida
membra vultus et habitus exterior promitunt religionem, sed actus viri
spurcissimi negant nos esse quales similitatis atrocem severum podice levi
id est plano quia non relinqunt ibi pilum. Marisce P sunt quedam
carnicule que nascuntur in mulieribus ex assiduitate patiendi 89, quas dicens
cindi abhor< rit > . podice notat illos de sodomitio vicio rarus sermo hoc
loco ostendit modum exterioris habitus libido voluptas verius ergo
quandoquidem> simulant se religiosos cum non sint ergo verius
Peribonius fuit quidam lecator. Lecator nec ipocrita nescit esse. Vivit ;
subaudi ego imputo < etc > vel quod ita ipse se habet. Dico <« ex fatorum
... r dispone ; continge » Morbum vicium horum id est Peribonii et
similium simplicitas id est quod ipsi nesciunt que faciunt, sed bene putant
agere, est miserabilis his furor ipse quia lecatores furibundi sunt et ita
non est curandum quid agant, quia ipso furore suo veniam merentur sed
peiores isti < qui > s mali sunt ; sed peiores quoque sunt qui sub speciem
religionis a malo opere non quiescunt verbis Herculis id est mentientes
in se Herculis fortitudinem esse ; quia ita demitunt vultum quasi essent
virtuosi invadunt talia qualia nos prediximus agitant clunem id est movent
renes
ego te hic quemdam eorum nomine tangit : Sextum, qui unus erat de
secta Stoicorum qui sepe quemdam Varillum nomine lecatorem corripiebat,
exprob<r >anst ei vicia sua, quem tandem Varillus non valens ulterius
ferre, contra ipsum in hec verba prorumpit : ego te cevere est proprie in
coitu renes movere infamis propter lecacitatem suam vel infamis factus
Sexto ei improbante vicia sua quo deterior te sum ego ; qui clam peius
agis quam ego palam Aethiopem id est nigrum Quis tulerit Gracos verba
sunt auctoris quasi diceret « huius modi secte homines omnia reprehen-
dunt, et ipsi tamen ea que damnant w faciunt. Et quis hoc possit pati ? »

88. Matt. 23. 27 : « Quia similes estis sepulcris dealbatis ».

89. Cf. Martialis , Epigramata, 12. 97.
p. marisse, P.
q. quandoqui, P.
r. post fatorum illegibile, P.
s. isti quid, P.
t. exprobans, P.
v. lecacitatem ut vid.
w. dagnant, P.
 IN SATIRAM 2.8-30 143

quasi diceret « nemo. >> Et hoc per similem ostendit, quia quis inquit
tulerit Gracos de seditione Graccus fuit quidam nepos magni Scipionis, qui
vice quadam excitavit plebem contra nobiles, et fecit etiam illam sedere
in Aventino monte . Et fuit diu maxima seditio inter plebem et nobiles .
Dicit ergo a<u >ctor * quod si Graci quererentur de aliquo qui seditionem
excitasset in populo, quis hoc posset pati cum ipsi auctores seditionis
extricarent ? Et vocat Gracum et illius complices Gracos. Per hoc itaque
et per alia que inducit, ostendit graviter esse tolerandos illos ipocritas,
vicia da<m >nantes y quibus laborant. Seditio dicitur per antifrasim
quasi sedatio, vel sedatio seorsum icio quis celum non misceat iurando per
celum et terram et mare celo in eodem iuramento. Verres fuit quidam,
et Milo homicida, et quis non misceat ? si Claudius mechus ille accuset
mechos, Catilina Cethegum id est coniurator, quia hii duo coniuratores
patrie fuerunt 91 in tabula Silla expulso Mario vi obtinuit rem publicam>
et imperium Romanum, et proscripsit omnes nobiles 92. Proscribere est
aliquem da<m >nare ², ne amplius in res suas licenciam habeat, et dicitur
«< proscribe » quasi procul ab hereditate scribere. Rome vero solebant
proscripti in tabula scribi 93. Post Sillam vero Pompeius, Crassus, Cesar
obtinuerunt rem p <ublicam> et quemadmodum et Silla proscriptores
fuerunt nobilium. Dicit ergo Iuvenalis quis non misceat etc se tres disci-
puli concubitu pollutus et celo ; dicant in tabulam Sylle id est accusant
Sillam de proscriptione nobilium cum illud fecerunt. In tabulam Sille
dicit quia ut dictum est in tabulam solebant scribi proscripti leges, ergo
in tabulam id est contra tabu<lam > . Bene dicit discipuli quia quasi
edocti a Silla, ad modum eius proscribebant nobiles, vel sub Silla fuerunt
qualis erat Quis scilicet non misceat celum terris si talis adulter dicat in
alteros tales qualis erat. adulter nuper pollutus et concubitu id est digno
de quo fieri tragedia. De Nerone hoc dicit : Nero concubuerat cum sua
sorore 4. Et conceperat illa de ipso, timensque ne videretur pre<g >nans a
veneficio puerum in ventre suo necavit. Et abortivum fecit et mem-
bratim extraxit qui tunc leges leges date fuerunt à Romanis in adulteros,
sed post tempus Neronis postponite et sopite erant, Nerone vocante eas .
Hoc ergo dicit auctor ad aggerationem nequitie eius ut magis damnaret
eum qui cum pessimus adulter esset leges tum in adulteros datas
revocar<e >tc, et contra leges quas instituerat graviter pecabat Veneri

90. Gracci cf. Valerius Maximus , 1. 1 et seq., and Cicero, Brutus, 86 etc.
91. Cf. Sallustius, Catilina 1. 1 seq.
92. Cf. Scholia, p. 19.
93. Cf. Cicero, De divinatione ad M. Brutus 1. 37. 721 , and Sallustius, Bellum Jugurtinum,
esp. 98-100.
94. Scholia, p. 20 ; Pithoeana scholia testificantur Claudium ; scholia (Cornutus, etc.)
Neronem .

x. actor, P.
y. dagnantes, P.
z. dagnare, P.
a. prenans, P.
b. dagnaret, P.
c. revocarat, P.
144 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

Martique legitur de Nerone, Venere et Marte, quod adulterati sunt et

Vulcanus deprehendit eos in abdulterio. Et hoc fabulosum est, et subest
veritas. Hoc enim nihil aliud est nisi quod Mars est quedam stella multum
nociva Venus alia multum benivola, et sunt vicine stelle. Contingit ergo
aliquando quod existente Venere in summitate sui circuli Mars est in infe-
riore parte sui et tunc quodam modo adulterantur stelle ille ; quia et
Veneris bona volentia et mala volentia Martis tunc minora<n >tur, et hoc
deprehendit Vulcanus, id est fervor ingenii. Vulcanus enim dicitur quasi
bonecona, id est fervor ingenii 95 cum tot abortivis abortiva vocat frustra
« pueri », quod ipsa abortivum fecerat patruo id est Neronid, quia filius
Neroni sororis nepos est fratris offas id est membra nonne igitur quan-
doquidem << huius modi ipocrite quale », prediximus, « eadem agunt et
reprehendunt nonne ? » iure quantum ad leges merito quantum ad hoc
quod illi merentur ultima vitia id est ultimi viciosi fictos Scauros id est
illos qui fingunt se Scauros cum ipsi pessime agant ; Scauri fuerunt probi
Romani, et castigata remordent id est reprehensi reprehendunt vel aliter
nonne igitur et cetera hoc non monentur ; ultima vicia, id est pessima
vicia illorum contempnunt id est contemptibiles reddunt fictos Scauros
hoc non mutatur et castigata < inserviet > e ipsis remordent propter
malam conscientiam
Non tulit ex illis hic ponit Iuvenalis verba cuiusdam meretricis Lau-
ronie, scilicet que multociens a quodam illorum ipocritarum reprehensa,
tandem redidit ei vicem pro vice Iulia lex erat lex que da<m > nabat f
adulteros ; dormit autem lex quando secundum eam nihil agitur felicia
tempora ironia est pudorem de pecuniis tercius Cato quia duo fuerant
Censorinus et Uticensis % obassama balsamum est arbor, ut testatur Dias-
corides 97, que numquam excedit mensuram ; cultri de incisione corticis
eius nascitur unguentum, quod vocatur opobalsamum. De incisione vero
ipsius ligni nascitur aliud unguentem, et dicitur sirobalsamum. De coac-
tione autem, et ex expressione fructus ipsius arboris, fit aliud quod vocatur
carpobalsamum. De foliis arboris, fit aliud quod vocatur foliatum bal-
samum. Opabassamum vero inter alia preciosius est et tam rarum est ut
quidam aiunt quod de eo non nascitur in anno plus quam scilicet
libr<a.> Huius modi autem unguentum quod suavius redolet, solebant
emere leccatores et ex eo ungebant se circa collum, suaviter possent suis
amatoribus redolere unde et sic leges que spirant tibi hirsuti etc vexantur
leges quando contra ipsas agitur leges quantum ad scripta vicia, quantum
ad consuetudines citari commoveri et recovari Scantinia lex erat que

95. Vulcanus - Guillaume de Conches, In Platonem, (Éd . Jeauneau) , p. 93. also : Fulgentius
Virgiliana continentia (ed . Helm) , p. 105, 5-6.
96. Cf. Scholia, p. 20 ; Isidorus 17. 8. 14.
97. Dioscorides , De materia medica 1. 18 .
d. Neroni', P.
e. in so met pro inserviet, P.
f. dagnabat, P.
g. libre, P.
 IN SATIRAM 2.30-58 145

da<m > nabath succubos et paticos 98 numerus id est multitudo quia quod
a multis peccatur inultum est iunctaque umbone per similitudinem loqui-
tur quemadmodum enim incedentes ad bellum, ita sunt iuncti quod
clipeus clipeum tangit. non cito possunt dissolvi, similiter tot erant patici,
et tam spissi, quod nemo poterat eos multitudine defendere Tedia i mere-
trix illa non lambit id est non osculatur lambendo Cluviam illam aliam
meretricem, sed Hispo utroque morbo id est agendi et patiendi non quid
nos agimus causas ita vos vituperatis officia nostra sed nos nequaquam
nostra luctantur vicium quod penitus ponit aufferi mulieribus ; ab eis ideo
removit quod vero non omnino potest eis aufferre , saltem more periti
oratoris diminuit colinfia genus est panis, ad modum virilis membri, quo
utebantur gladiatores ad vires suas a<u>gmentandas k. Ille enim panis
non tam cito digeritur quemadmodum alius ¹ ; pregnantem quia in media
gressus est fusus ad modum mulieris pregnantis levius id est subtilius
Aragne mirabilis operatrix fuit, de qua legitur quod cum Palladis certamen
ingressa est ad probandum que melius operabantur, et victa mutata est in
Araneam, et nota quod Ponelope et Aragne dativus pro ablativis horrida
quale facit illud quale ad istud respicit pregnantem stamine tenui tali
scilicet quale facit pelex Aragne que pelex dicitur quia palladium vidit et
pelices invide sunt horrida quia mutata in Araneam est, que horrorem
mitit residens in pro in cortice ; quia tres sunt in arbore cortices : suber
qui est proximus arbori ; et liber, vel codex, post suberem ad modum
folii 2 ; cortex que exterior est. Aranea, vero ut dicunt, ex fumo et cortice
arboris nascitur. Unde et hic dicitur Aragne residens in codice vel aliter :
< licebat > antiquis habere uxores et concubinas, uxores autem reside-
bant in cathedris, concubine super truncum, et ibi trahebat pensa. Dicit
ergo auctor << vos torquetis fusum pregnantem, enim stamine tali scilicet
quale facit » pelex id est concubina residens in codice id est super
tru<n >cum m vel huius modi vilem sellam. Notum est Adhuc sunt verba
Lauronie, et notat hic quoddam vicium quo laborant patici . Habebant
enim uxores suas et cum illis amasios, et numquam in uxores sed in ama-
sios semper agebant. Sed iccirco uxores habebant ne vicium eorum omni-
bus pateret, dabant multa uxoribus ut eos paterentur. Et quando morie-
bantur, scribebant garciones heredes suos, et hoc vicium notat, et hoc per
quemdam eorum qui Hister dicebatur quem, sicut prediximus fecisse,
commemorat. Dicit ergo notum est Hister iste servum habuerat in quem
agebat, et ideo de servo fecerat eum liberum, et scripsit eum heredem
puelle uxori scilicet sue quam puellam acceperat et in quam numquam

98. Cf. Suetonius, Vita Domitiani, 8.

99. Cf. Scholia, p. 20.
1. Ibid.
2. Cf. Isidorus 17. 6. 15-17.
h. dagnabat, P.
i. Media, Juv. (Tedia is « vulgate » reading).
k. agmentandas, P.
1. licetbat, P.
m. trumcum, P.
10
146 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

egerat dives erit illa scilicet que poterit pati garcionem mariti in lecto
secum tu nube dicit Lauro <nia > ad quamlibet atque tace quoniam
arcana donant Idri sunt serpentes habitantes tantum modo in aqua quia
idor est aqua. Chelindri vero sunt serpentes habitantes modo in aqua
modo in terra, quia chelin est terra, idor aqua. Et habent rotundam
formam , facti enim ad modum rotunde columne. Chelindre ergo dicit
catenas aureas vel argenteas quas ponunt mulieres circa collum, vel quod-
libet aurum vel argentum seu etiam lapides preciosos habentes formam
chelindroidem³ corvis viciosis et nigris in peccatis columbas simplices et
innocentes.

(Baltimore. Walters Art Gallery (Paris. Bibliothèque Nationale La-

20.) tin 2904. )

fugerunt etc huc usque fuerunt fugerunt et cetera, verba auctoris

verba Lauronie, modo loquitur Iuve- scilicet
nalis in persona, seu sic vera ac
manifesta et vere canebat vera quia
quid falsi dixit Laur <onia > , ac si
diceret << nichil » si quid reprehen-
sis ... † certis < prelacis > a qui
cum talia debuissent corrigere pre-
teriora faciebant, et hoc est Stoicide
sic nominati sunt a qu<a>damb
porticu in qua homines huius secte
Athen < is > c solebant studere.
Stoas enim porticus cuius propter
verba Lauronie sed quid non facient
proprium est nomen vel ab † no- quid non facient alii ad aliud vicium
m <ine > † ab eventu, quia illi vel transit et reprehendit iudices qui
aliquis de progenie sua deviant ; meretrices da<m >narent " et habi-
certim tu meritricio utebantur

sumas multicia multicium est mu- Multicia vestimenta sunt muliebra

liebre indumentum quasi multa
capiens in longum et in latum, vel
< dictum > d multicium a multo,
multas, quia multant vestimenta
sua dum rigantes e et per hoc vesti-
a militum et capiendo, quia militum
tele capiunt ; vel a multando quod
vulgariter dicitur iudex Cretice pro-
prium nomen est cuiusdam iudicis,
vel sit nomen cuiuscumque iudicis

3. Cf. Scholia, p. 22.

z. post reprehensis lectio incerta, W. n. dagnarent, P.
a. reprelacis, W.
b. quodam, W.
c. Athen, W.
d. distum, W.
e. rigantea, W (?).
 IN SATIRAM 2.60-74
mentum notat istum effeminatum ,
et cum P <roculis > inde musis,
ponit n<on > hanc vestem quia
superius illam non esse hominis sed
femine in Proculas id est contra
Proculas et Labulla illas meretrices
quibus tu es deterior ; modo pona-
mus quia Labulla mechia
si vis damnetur pro adulterio suo
vel tuo dampnetur a iudicio
estuo ille mensis ardet † ... † contra
Isic ait Iuvenalis
Carfinia illa meretrix non sumet
talem togam id est tam luxuriosum
vestimentum , deinde subiungit excu-
sationem quam post iste preten-
d<it > f sic, sed dices mihi
agas nudus turpis turpius est enim
in hoc vestimento agere quam
nudum en habitum Horac <ius >
hoc dicit habitum quo
modo victor et magnus ; argumento
superio a minori, hoc vestimentum
probat turpe esse in corpore iudici,
quia etiam testi, qui est inferior,
esset turpe, et hic est Cretice positis
id est depositis, ac si diceret non
audire de vestimento
f. pretende, W.
147
dirivatum a Greco, quod est crisis,
id est iudicium .
in Proculas et Polliucas nomina
meretricum sunt facticia, Procule
quasi procul a numero maternarum
eiecte ; Polliuce quasi pollute est 4
mechia Labulla verba sunt auctoris
vel iudicis. Labulla nomen mere-
tricis a labe
si vis Carfinia hec solius auctoris
sunt verba ad iudicem quasi diceret
« tu iudex precipis damnare Labul-
lam >>
esto etc cum ipsa etiam damnaretur
Carfinia illa alia meretrix certe ipsa
talem non sumet damnata togam
non tam meretricio utetur habitu
sed tu dices mihi Iulius ardet esto
non habens defessionem quia dico
tibi << si aliam vestam non potens
pati pre calore, melius est et
honestius >>
ut nudus agas en abitum ironia est,
quasi diceret in hoc habitu non
audiet te placitantem et iudicantem
populus Romanus [ que] hunc po-
pulum qui modo precessit leges
scripe iura consuetudines crudis re-
centibus pro defensione rei p<ubli-
ce> populus modo id est paulo ante
victor perifrasis est : populi Romani
non moderni sed preteriti et illud
montanum montanum vulgus vocat
rusticos eo quod in montibus habi-
tare solent. Rustici autem in festis
diebus veniunt ad urbem et audiunt
placita cum intersunt consilio sa-
pientium
4. Scholia, p . 22.
o. que (post Romanus) omissi.
148 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
ac si diceret ex quo non decentem
testem multo minus igitur decen-
tem iudicem
acer hic ostendit qualis debet & esse
iudex, quondam acer
dedit hanc subiungit deinde, unde
hoc vicium habuit principium.
principium.
Contagio est infirmitas porcorum
que ex quo contingit in uno, cadit in
totam gregem. Unde dicitur conta-
gio a contingendo, quia omnis simul
tangit, et per hoc quod dicit hanc in
nudum hoc vitium descendere ab
uno, scilicet a Nerone in populum
descendit, deinde subiungit sic
< uvaque livorem etc > quemad-
modum vicina tacta, id est putre-
dinem , et subiungit quare. Diceret
iste sic vestiri non est malum, ideo
subiungit quod sit quia ex hoc ad
aliud pervenies. Unum malum ex
alio nascitur, et hoc est < audebis >
et subiungit quem ordinem ad
† < aliud > † descendit ; id est de
uno vitio in aliud transeundo ubi a
paucis videntur
g. debuat (2nd hand).
quero an deceant probat a minori
quod huius modi habitus non decet
iudicem, quia nec etiam testem, et
hoc est quero an deceant quasi
diceret << non, et tu, o tu >» Cretice
qui debes esse
acer in vindicta indomitus per pe-
cuniam et magister id est defensor
liberatisque perluces id est per me-
diam vestem luces
dedit hanc contagio labem et dabit
impertivit hoc vicium. Scilicet ab
alio accepisti et aliis relinques.
Contagio proprie nomen est morbi
porcorum et dicitur a contingendo,
quia uno tacto, illo morbo tangun-
tur omnes alii 5. Alio nomine etiam
dicitur morbus ille purrigo a purien-
do, quod vulgariter dicitur « gra-
tum». Dicitur porrigo quia ab uno
porco per totum gregem porrigitur,
unde in versu sequenti leges in
quibusdam libris porrigine in aliis
purrigine
Uvaque quia una ex putredine alte-
rius putrefit Fedius quia posset
iudex pro se vel alius pro illo hac
defensione uti, quod scilicet num-
quam peius incurreret vicium, ita
ipsum pro tali indumenti usu non
esse da<m > nandum P. Iccirco
Iuvenalis hoc aufert ei et dicit
adhuc ad turpius vicium declinare,
et hoc est fedius quasi diceret << tali
iudex uteris indumento, sed hic non
pones metam criminibus » nemo
repente probat quod dixerat « vere
fedius ages », quia per successiones
veniunt vicia.
5. Isidorus 4. 6. 18.
p. dagnandum , P.
 IN SATIRAM 2.76-87
ta ... t redimicula sunt ea quibus
mulieres redimiunt, id est ornant
suas comas. Et ita hic notat pati-
COS.
monilia monile est illud quod
sponse preponunt pectori, deinde
mon<ile > quia monet castitatem
vel deinde < dicitur monile > quasi
munile quia munit pectus, ne adul-
ter manum imponat.
Bona Dea est Flora, pedisseca
Veneris, cuius festum sole mere-
trices solebant colere, ut gratiores
essent earum concubitus. Patici
eadem causa colunt deam ; et
natura, quod dicit hanc deam
que ad luxurias pertinet, placeri
+ a<vebant > th ; et cratere quia
sine Cerere et Bacho friget nullus
sacrificia, sicut sint sus Cereri,
caper Bachoi, quia nocet viti sus
< caper > * et quia nocet frugibus
sed more sinistro id est parva
consuetudine. Apud antiquos festis
Flore non adhibebantur mares, sed
sole femine. Modo converso more
non femine sed soli mares recipiun-
tur procul a templo
h. ante et illegibile, conieci avebant.
i. caper Bacho (ante caper) omissi.
k. carer (pro caper) , W.
149
accipient te patici solebant circum-
ligare crines suos redimiculis sicut
mulieres, et ornare colla monilibus ;
tantundem est quod dicit accipient
te qui sic faciunt, quasi diceret
adhuc paticus efficieris. Redimicu-
lum a redim <i >o, redimis , ideo
quod eo capilli intricantur ; monile
a moneo, eo quod moneat castita-
tem vel, monile quasi munile eo
quod pectus muniat ut non possit
quislibet iniectare manum atque
Bonam Bonam Deam dicit Floram " ;
Flora, que dea a erat, pedissequa
Veneris, et erat dea meretricum et
illi solebant meretrices sacrificare
in Aprili ut per totum annum place-
rent amatoribus. Sed adeo exercue-
rant officium paticorum ut iuxta r
meretricum ; ipsi Flore sacrifi-
carent, et eadem de causa sacrifi-
cabant autem, ab derma porce et
cratera vini quia sacrificium quan-
doque fit per similem quandoque
per contrarium 7; per contra-
<rium > sicut hedus sacrificatur
Bacho, qui vitibus inimicus est, et
sus Cereri. Istud autem sacrifi-
cium Flore fiebat per similem quia
ipsa immunda est et propter im-
mundiciam sacrificabatur ei porca,
quia immundum animal est. Ite-
rum ipsa pedissequa est Veneris, et
sine Cerere et Bacho friget Venus 8
et ideo sacrificabatur et in vino
sed more sinistro mulieres quando
solebant sacrificare Flore predicto
modo non admitebant viros ad
sacrificia . Unde dicit sinistro, id
est malo more femine non intrant
6. Cf. Macrobius, Saturnalia 1. 12. 21.
7. Ovidius, Metamorphoseon 15. 110-17.
8. Terentius, Eunuchus 4. 5. 6.
9. Cf. Scholia, p. 24.
q. dea (ante dea) omissi.
r. iusta, P.
150 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
talia per simile improbat huius
† < modi > † festa, scilicet per
inventionem illorum, dicens clama-
tur voce saculorum dicta intus orgia
sacrificia, proprie dicuntur festa Ba-
chi. Dicitur ab orge quod est colere.
Maior enim cultura est in vineis
quam in aliis, sed hic < ponitur > m
pro quibuslicet festis per sinodo-
chem tibicina in templo immo soli
tibicines Bapte populi ; mollet vo-
cando in Prosperpinam ; sunt po-
puli Athenienses > n qui, accensa
lucerna in secreto loco, festa Pros-
perpine coluerunt. Qua extincta
unusquisque eo quem tenebat abu-
tebatur. Unde dicti sunt Bache, id
est mollens Cochiton id est Proser-
pinam deam, a cochito fluvio Infer-
nali, qui interpretatur luctus.
ille aliud vicium effeminatum notat
sic
acus est instrumentum quo mulie-
res extrahunt pilos superciliorum,
et deinde tingunt fuligine, quia
nigra supercilia placent in mu-
<liere >
1. modi, conieci.
m. ponitur, conieci.
n. Athenies, W.
o. vicius (?), W.
p. acu, Iuv.
talia secreta Balte erant quidam
populi et de nocte faciebant que-
dam festa ad honorem Proser-
pine. Et erat ibi in medio eorum
sola lucerna, completisque Solle-
mis, extinguebant lucernam et acci-
piebant < quique > s suum et mu-
tuo se abutebantur. Predictorum
ergo sacrificia assimula<n >tt Bal-
torum sacrificiis ; secreta quia de
nocte fiebant illa festa etiam in
secreto orgia proprie dicuntur festa
Bachi a Greca « orge », quod est
colere 10, quia maiorem culturam
expetunt vinee quam alia. Et hic
orgia ponit pro quolibet festo spe-
ciem pro genere, et est sinedoche
Crecopiam Atheniensem quia de
Athenis fuit Proserpina soliti lassare
invocando Cochiton Cochitum flu-
vius infernalis et interpretatum
luctus 11 , sed hic ponitur pro Pro-
serpina, et cum sit masculini gene-
ris, iungitur femina
ille supercilium quedam muliebra
officia in viris reprehendit ; et
adhuc vicio immoratur fuligine
quoddam nigrum quod ex fumo
nascitur, quo mulieres solent ungere
supercilium ad ipsum denigrandum
quod in supers <il > io pulcrum
est. Unde Maximianus : nigra
supercilia, frons libera, lumina nigra
urebant animum sepe notata
meum 12 acus instrumentum mulie-
brum quo afferuntur pili
10. Cf. Isidorus 6. 19. 36.
11. Isidorus 14. 9. 8.
12. Maximianus, Elegiae 1. 95-96.
s. quisque, P.
t. assimulat, P.
v. supersio, P.
 IN SATIRAM 2.90-98
producit dicit non quia inde pro-
ductiora sunt, sed quia productiora
apparent, quia quanto aliud est
gracilius, id est termino apparet
longius
pingitque id est ornat ; oculi natu-
raliter sunt pavidi, unde Staci clau-
dum dicitur
vitreo facto vase ad similitudinem
quod hoc die dicitur << rutuba >» .
Aliud vicium paticorum notat
reticulum est† g ... † a facta ad simi-
litudinem retis, quod deaurant ;
meretrices super ponunt comis suis,
et per hec omnia notat paticos qui
hec muliebra sibi assumebant scru-
tulatar sunt pallia habentia in
se rotundas forma ; a << scutum >>
quod est rotundum ; galbanum est
genus indumenti sine pilis, unde
rasa ; dicuntur solis meretricibus
convincis. In hoc notat istos effe-
minatos cum hec faciunt
et per Iunonem mos fuit antiquo-
rum quod viri iurarent per deos,
femine per deas, sed isti effeminati
iurabant per deas et per easdem
servos suos iurare cogebant
q. ante facta illegibile.
r. scutulata, Iuv.
s. convinci, ut vid.
151
oblica producit acu hoc dicit non
quia ita sit, sed videtur, quia falli-
tur visus, sicut et in multis aliis. Si
enim aliquid latum minus, latum
videtur esse longius
trementes quia proprium est ocu-
lorum ut sint pavidi, vel trementes
propter luxuriam
priapus vitreum vas est l< o > n-
gum W et rotundum, quod vulgo
dicitur << retumbo » 13 cum quo po-
tare tempore Iuvenalis mulierum
fuit et non virorum
reticulum quoddam ornamentum
muliebre ad modum retis factum
vulgo dictum « brecine >>
cerulea indutus scutala scuta, ut
dicit prius, est quelibet forma
rotunda 14, unde vestis habens huius
modi formam dicitur scutulata
aut galbina rasa pilis ex utraque
parte carentia ; ostendit enim
genus vestis pilosum ex utraque
< parte >, aliud ex neutra aliud in
altera parte tantum, et quod ex
utraque vulgariter dicitur « salum » ;
huius modi autem vestibus uteban-
tur mulieres et sole
et per Iunonem nota quod antiqui-
tus neque viri per deas neque
femine per deos iurabant, sed isti
per illos ille per illas 15. Sed modo
adeo effeminati et molles erant
13. Retumbes, Old French for tasse, a
cup (in Dict. Hist. de l'ancien lang. Franç.
ed. C. Sainte Palaye, Paris, 1887).
14. Cf. Isidorus 12. 1. 51.
15. Cf. Scholia, p. 25.
w. lungum, P.
x. tempestate pro parte ; corr.
152 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
per Iunonem per quam iurat suus
dominus ; aliud muliebre notat in
eis
Othonis Galba imperator 37 specu-
lum mirabile composuit, quod Beba-
rico Palato suo amasio donavit,
quod cum viduntur, Otho paticus
Galbam occidit, et Barbaraco spe-
culum abstulit ; et hoc notat in
istis versibus
Spolium et est constancia Othonis
in quam cupere
Actoris Arunci spolium hic est dimi-
dius versus Vergilii, nimium mor-
daciter a Iuve<na >li indictus.
Actor enim Aruncus fuit miles tante
fortitudinis quod eo mortuo solus
Turnus hastam eius vibrare potuit,
unde hic yronice dicit hoc Speculum
spolium Actoris Arunci etc id est
ablatum est Actor a Arunco, quasi
d<iceret > << non sed effeminato et
patico g<estamen > , » vel quo
<s>peculo t dicitur de Actore
37. Scholia, pp. 23-24.
t. peculo, P.
quod iuramentum mulierum usurpa-
bant, quod notat ministro ; id est
quod y dicens iurabat, et eum
< iurante > z cogebat, et secundum
hanc sententiam et < expleta > a
convictio est, in alia vero potest
esse completa et sit ; domini nomi-
nativus casus et subaudiatur ; iurant
ut sic sensus et domini iurant per
Iunonem iurant ministro id est ipsi
cogunt iurare per eandem deam
ille tenet speculum aliud muliebre
notat in viris quod se considerabant
in speculis patici gestamen Othonis
Otho iste fuit consul Romanus et
habuit speculum quoddam in quo
se considerabat quando armatus
erat 16, ne aliquid esset quod deho-
nestaret eum . Armabat autem
puerum quemdam Beberacum Pala-
tum , et dedit ei speculum suum.
Galba vero Romanus civis illi
abstulit, unde Otho contra ipsum
prelium cum ipso inivit, et eum
occidit. Vocat ergo auctor specu-
lum gestamen Othonis eo quod se
in illo videbat
Auctoris Aurunci spolium in Virgi-
lio habitur versus iste 17. Legitur
autem de Auctore isto quod ipse vir
fortis, simus fuit, et habuit clipeum
quem ipso mortuo solus Turnus
sustinere potuit. Spolium ergo
illius dicit auctor clipeum eum et
est ironia, quod speculum vocat spo-
lium Actoris
16. Cf. Scholia, p. 25.
17. Virgilius, Aeneis 12. 94 ; also Servius.
y. quem (?), P pro quod²
z. iuralce , P.
a. expletam, P.
 IN SATIRAM 2.98-102 153

Arunco, et ... Actor Aruncus

videbat se, in s <peculo >

quo <speculo > Otho, tante enim
fuit luxurie quod se in speculo
arma<tum > w videbat
Digitis et est constancia, scilicet
digitis extendere.
quo se istud quo quidam ad specu-
lum quidam ad spolium referunt
Isti ergo sic legunt quo spolio id est
quo clipeo ille Auctor videbat expe-
riebatur se

iam vexilla iuberat ac si diceret cum iam vexilla id est quando

« non, quia talis vita non exiguit pugnare debebat ; alii : quo speculo
tale instrumentum. » Campo Mar- ille id est Otho videbat se armatum
cio, secundum fuit Civile Bellum vel ad bellum vel ad luxuriam
... pt X speculo. vexilla bellica vel bracas pueri

cerulea antiqui enim † ... ty < re-

verantiam > z mense conferebant
quia illius conviviis omnes tacebant,
sola honesta dicebant. Sed † en ... † a
nulla est reverentia mense, quia
superflua et inhonesta in conviviis
loquitur

novis analibus annales sunt libri in novis quia numquam fuit auditum
quibus sunt scripta facta singulo- aliqui <d > b huius modi
rum annorum quia fastis et nefastis
diebus dicuntur fasti unde Ovidius
Fastorum

atque memoranda historia est nar- Res memoranda annalibus annales

ratio rei geste a memoria remote. dicebantur libri in quibus scribe-
Dicta historia ab historon, quod est bantur facta unius anni, et intitu-
videre, ea enim que historia nar- labantur a nominibus consulum
rantur aliquando visa fuerunt. illius anni
Quod vero dicit rem gestam memo-
randam novis analibus et recenti
historia, vel yronice hoc dicit vel
ideo << quid dignum est scribi ? »
Ut memoria eorum pro nequitia
habeatur, quatenus posteri illam
fugiant, ad eum subiungit rem
illam, scilicet quod

v. ante actor illegibile. b. aliqui, P.

w. arma, P.
x. post Bellum incerta.
y. post enim incertum.
z. reverantum (?), W.
a. post sed incertum.
154 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
speculum fuit sarcina id est causa
civilis Belli inter Othonem et Gal-
bam ; dices b ne alter eorum vide-
retur extra culpam. Subiungit
nimirum id est certe.
Bebaracus erat proprium nomen ;
Palatus id est palatinus ab oriente,
quia frequentat > palatium im-
peratoris. Meretrices accipiunt sili-
gineum panem calidum quem exten-
dunt super faciem, quia attrahit
sanguinem ad superficiem et facit
optimi colorem quod notat Otho-
nem et Galbam fecisse . Deinde
aufert, ostendit mulieres quod sci-
licet
Semirami regina Tholome. Legitur
de bona Semirami, quod mortuo
viso a patre suo frater suus erat
etatis nimis tenere. Ista assumpsit
pharetram et arma, pugnavit, quia
pro patre fratrem vero per pedisse-
cas suas in thalamo nutriri fecit,
unde tantum effeminatus est, quod
cum regnaret missis suis ducibus
ad prelium, illius thalamo mulie-
briter inter feminas, ignorantibus
suis ducibus, vixit. Cum vero qua-
b. dices, incertum.
c. frequentat, coni.
d. niso (?), W.
quod speculum civilis belli id est
quod pro speculo inivit Otho Civile
Bellum cum Galba
nimirum et Othonem et Galbam
reprehendit ; Othonem quia tam
inhonesta causa Galbam interfecit,
Galbam vero quia speculum puero
aubstulit. Dicit ergo yronice summi
ducis est id est summum ducem
pertinet occidere Galbam pro tali
causa et hic ad Othonem referens
Bebriacis Palati proprium nomen
est illius pueri curare cutem auf-
ferre scilicet instrumentum quod
spectat ad curationem cutis, scilicet
speculum campo Martio, quia ibi ei
abstulit illud vel campo campestri
prelio, et pressum faciem mulieres
accipiunt panem < siligineum > c,
et tostum cum lacte asine apon< i >-
tumd genis, et reddit genas ruben-
tes, et delicatam facit cutem . De
hoc ergo muliebri reprehendit Gal-
bam et consimiles ; dicit ergo summi
ducis, est predicta facere et etiam
extendere faciem et est ironia nec
Semiramis faretrata Semiramis
regina Egipti fuit et habuit quem-
dam fratrem Sardamam paulum
vocatum 18. Ille, mortuo patre suo
repugnante etate, non potuit obti-
nere regnum, et successit Semira-
mis loco fratris sui, et virilibus ves-
tibus inducta incedebat pharetrata
ad modum viri.
Obtinuit regnum usque dum frater
etatem habuit. Postea, professa est
quid egerat et quare, et fratrem
18. Cf. Justinus, Historiae Philippicae 1.
1-2.
c. siligrineam, P.
d. apontum, P.
 IN SATIRAM 2.103-111
dam die quidam de ducibus suis
causa querendi consilii, ad eum
intraret, et sic eum intra mulieres
invenisset, eum occidit ... † † ... †
† ... te dignus conducti ; indoceret
facere bona Semiramis ita imitant
sacerdotes Cibelis
et quod non fecit Cleopatra carina
Leucas et Actianum promontoria
sunt iuxta que Augustus navali
prelio contra Anthonium et Cleopa-
tram pugnavit. Quibus devictis ,
Cleopatra apposuit aipides < sic >
mamillis suis et sic mortua est. Ac
si diceret iste << quamvis essent
muliebres non fecerunt quod et isti
imperatores. >>
pudor notat alia vitia quia omnia
verba immunda dicunt
fracta voce libidinosa, vel effeminati
antistes quasi ante stanis, ut presur
Cibeles est mater deorum que terra
est, quia ex terra multi sunt nati qui
in numero deorum reputantur .
Dicitur Cibele quasi cuberes, terra
enim est cubicum corpus et solidius
ceteris elementis unde turrita pin-
gitur propter turres et edificia 38.
Dicitur quod leones currum illius
trahunt propter imperatores et
reges qui in terra dominantur.
38. Guillaume de Conches, In Platonem ,
p. 197.
e. lemma incertum, W.
155
suum fecit regem . Ille vero re-
gnante sorore, inter mulieres nutri-
tus fuerat et ibi adeo effeminatus
scuratus est quod ad modum viri
se habere nescivit. Sed soror per
proceres, quibus non erat vita eius
nota, faciebat obtinere regnum .
Eandem die quadam contigit, quod
quidam procerum ingressus est ad
eum et non potuit abscondere † e
se et invenit eum inter mulieres,
muliebribus indutum. Et non iudi-
cans eum dignum imperio, occidit,
et sibi regnum assumsit et hic est
quod auctor eam vocat pharetratem.
Sub Auct <iana > quia sub Actio et
Leucadio promentoria navali prelio
victa fuit 19
hic nullus hic reprehendit Romanos,
de immundicia loquenda hic Rome
reverentia mense quia in cena non
exibetur alicui reverentia, sed dete-
riores primum occupant locum
Cibeles turpes Cibeles quasi Cube-
les, mater deorum, terra dicitur et
pingitur turrita propter turres et
alia edificia que in terra sunt 20.
Ipsa vero Rome quoddam templum
habebat, sed eius sacerdotes viciosi
erant et inhoneste vivebant, unde
dicit auctor hic id est Rome est Ci-
beles turpis id est hic turpiter
vivunt sacerdotes Cibeles gutturis
19. Cf. Suetonius, Vita Augusti 17 ; Virgi-
lius, Aeneis 8. 707.
20. Cf. Mythographus 3. 2. 3.
e. abscondere, ut vid.
156 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
Quando vero dicit illam esse tur-
pem , non ad ipsam dominam sed
ad sacerdotes illius qui immundi
erant referendum est. hic Roma
Gutteris exemplum voracitatis, quia
vix tantum guttur potest reperiri,
unde notat eum gulosum
Frigio more mos enim fuit Troiano-
rum quod sacerdotes Cibeles men-
tulam petr<o >nisf cultris sibi
abscindebant &
quadringenta aliud in paticos notat
quod quidem nobiles de progenie
Otorum cornicini duxit pro uxore ;
illi quadrigentia sextercia dedit
dotem Graccus ille nobilis
sive hic i ... enuit † quasi diceret
<< nescio si cornicen fuit aut tibi-
cen », et hoc non fecit occulte quia
cantaverat cornu enim est.
signate tabule in quibus scriptum
est matrimon <i >um¹ ut in lega-
f. petrinis, W.
g. absenidebant, W.
h. matrimonum, W.
exemplum de gulositate ipsos epis-
copos reprehendit quia ex nimia
gulositate nimia pinguedo procedat
conducendusque yronia est quid
tamen apud Troiam erat templum
Cibeles, et erat mos omnes qui ad
sacrificia eius vocandi erant infra
annos castrabantur, unde dicit
«< quid expectant sacerdotes eius qui
sunt Rome ? » quod non castrantur
carnem virilia
quadrigenta dedit satis superius
dixerat in paticos. Iuvenalis modo
vult dicere mirabile quoddam quod
unus fecit, et eum proprio exprimit
nomine, et dicit ei quam non suffi-
ciebat occulte ... 21 peccare ; sed
in aperto < ducerunt > mulieres
garcionem sicut viri ux <ores >
... † nuptias fecit et hoc est Grac-
cus proprium nomen dedit Quadrin-
genta sicut solet fieri ... † < di >-
sponsationibus f mulierum 21. Nota
quod dos proprie est illud quod
accipit homo cum uxore, † ... s † ,
alio nomine dicimus maritagium;
illud vero quod dat homo uxori
† d ... ... † proprie dicitur non dos.
Sed hic auctor abutitur vocabulo
et ponit d <otem > † ... ... † 21
sive hic « Cornici » dico sive « tibi-
cini » quia nescio ; uter erat † ... †
ipso quod ... rat † 21
recto ere id est tuba quia distat
inter tubam et cornic<en > +
+ ... ... . ... stat est ere dicit
non quia ex ere sit sed quia
capita eius ere t ... † † ... †
... † tabule sicut solet fieri in
disponsationibus quia donatio scri-
21. ink stains.
f. sponsationibus, P.
 IN SATIRAM 2.114-126
libus nuptiis, et audientibus cunctis,
dictum est ; mos fuit antiquorum
ingenti voce in nuptiis
clamare feliciter, precantes scilicet
illam coniunctionem futuram feli-
cem ingens cum ingenti voce
Cena id est cenantes quia hoc am-
plius non fuit factum, quod mascu-
los mascul<i > ducunt
censore cum aliud contingebat con-
tra naturam confugiebant rationi i
ad aruspices, ut scirent quid hoc
signaret. Si non erat contra natu-
ram, ad censores ut illud iudicarent
et corrigerent. Est igitur summa
cum talia fiant ; est nobis aruspice
opus an consore cum
liberos id est contra naturam
agnum ac si diceret « non » segmen-
ta que sunt circa collum bonum, id
est meretricum.
segmenta illud inde notat in fla-
mine Iovis.
Flammea nude sunt rubea coloris
que ponebant ante facies nuben-
tium ad tegendum pudorem quem
habebant pro annitenda virginitate,
sed iste sacerdos nubens more
femine hec sibi assumpsit. sudavit
ancilibus dum Numa Pompeius qua-
dam die sacrificaret, cecidit rotun-
dus clipeus ante illum, et cum eo
venit vox dicens quod illum servaret
quia nisi esset ibi imperium Roma-
num perderet. Timens ergo furto
i. rationi (?) roni sic cod. (The sense
seems to be flee reason ; probably should
be in abl.).
157
bebatur in +tab<ula > † † ... †
t ... labantur tabule 21
dictum feliciter in nuptis solebant
omnes qui cont <vivabantur> < cla-
mare >† feliciter quod factum
commemorat in nuptiis de gar-
cione ts ... † feliciter est dictum
id est ingenti voce vel ibi est
id est ingenti voce vel ibi est punc-
tum dictum feliciter postea † †
† ... †
O proceres censore antiqui solebant
censores et aruspices et de † ... †
etudinem fiebant; intromitebant se
censores et ea corrigebant ; de his
vero que contingebant contra natu-
ram iudicabant aruspices, et postea
futura predicebant. Ut ergo osten-
dat Iuvenalis predicta fieri que Na-
tura querit sub interrogatione « quo
sit opus, censore an aruspice ? ; »
quasi diceret « non est opus censore
sed aruspice, quia hec fiunt contra
naturam et vere contra naturam »
quia horeres tu et putares etc quasi
diceret « non »
segmenta aliud vicium notando
transit. Post Romulum regnavit
Numa Pompilius, et amator pacis
erat et diversa sacrificiorum genera
invenit 22. Die vero quadam, cum
sacrificaret diis in campo quodam
extra Romam, quidam clipeus ro-
tundus, qui ancile dicitur, de celo
iuxta ipsum cecidit. Et dixer<a>t8
vox quedam quod ubi ancile istud
esset, esset caput imperii. Fecit
ergo Numa xi clipeos fieri expresse
similitudinis ei, ne aliquis vel furto
vel alio modo posset alibi ferre ;
22. Cf. Livius, Ab urbe condita 1. 18-25.
g. dixeret, P.
158 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
auferetur, duodecim eiusdem simili-
tudines fecit fieri inter quos illum
commiscuit, ut fur veniens illum
non cognosceret. Et dicti sunt
ancillia a rotunditate, quasi circum
† ... sea † k huius ideo probatur.
Predictis vestimentis assumptis cui-
dem nupsit inde clamat Iu<vena-
lis > scilicet
o pater id est Mars propter Remum
et Romulum compositores urbis,
quos de ... bat¹ genuit. Laciis
pastoribus, id est prelatis. Vocat
pastores, quia primi Romani fuerant
pastores, unde in sequentibus dicit :
maiorque quisquis fuit etc aut pas-
tor fuit, ac si diceret « nolo dicere
unde » exagerando rem. Dicit unde
pastores hanc luxuriam sibi assu-
munt que in rusticis non solet esse,
et unde hec
k. post circum illegibile.
1. ante genuit illegibile.
habuit ergo deinceps Romanorum
consuetudo ut in sacrificiis porta-
retur illud ancile saltando circa
altaria. Et ad deportandum illud,
sacerdos erat institutus qui munde
et religiose debebat vivere ; sacer-
dotem illum reprehendit hoc loco
Iuvenalis de hoc quod muliebra
< habebat > h vestimenta segmenta
proprie mulierum sunt flammea
flameum est mitra rubea que faciei
nubet subponebatur ad tegendum
pudorem archana secreta quia de
celo descenderat ; secundum quos-
dam vel archano quia vel soli illi
qui ancile ferebat, vel paucis aliis
noto sacra secundum quosdam « re-
liquia », quia ancili superponeban-
tur reliquie nutantia quia saltando
ibat sacerdos loro corrigia qua
ancile de collo sacerdotis pendebat
sudabat pre pondere clipeis ancili-
bus sentencia est quorundam quod
sacerdos Iovis xii clipeos ferebat,
quia non poterat ab aliis sacrum
ancile discernere ; alii dicunt quia
solum sacrum ancile deferebat
o pater urbis exclamatio est ad
Martem quem vocat patrem urbis,
quia pater fuit Remi et Romuli qui
Romam fecerunt
pastoribus prelatis et summis sacer-
dotibus ; vel pastores fuerunt.
Gradive Mars. Mars dicitur Gradi-
vus quasi Cretus divus, id est po-
tens deus, vel Gradivus quia grada-
tim inceditur ad bellum vel a gradin
quod est vibrare 23
23. Cf. Virgilius, Aeneis 3. 325, Ovidius,
Fasti 5. 251 , Isidorus, Etymologiarum 8. 11.
52.
h. hebat, P.
 IN SATIRAM 2.126-135
urtica id est urens luxuria tetigit
Romani scilicet qui [ cui ] sunt
nepotes < medianis > m Remo et
Romulo, tuis filiis dicant
traditur ecce viro pro uxore, diceret
aliquis « quid curo ignobilis ? » ideo
addit
clarus genere iterum posset dicere
hoc facit paupertate cogente, ideo
addit clarus opibus ; ac si diceret
<< nobilis et dives est, naturaliter
unde apparet quod sola luxuria est
in omni, quia cum hec crimina
videas, O Mars »
non quassas quod est signum irati
ut, pro indignatione non moves
terram ad disentionem tuam
neglegis propter iterum † ... † et quo
modo scis talia et
nec multos adhibet a paucis hoc
multum sciri.
sed partum retinere quia partu
facere stabilem coniungunt intus
masculum et femininam Melius hic
esse mas quod natura nequit illis
pareant, hoc esse † ... † melius quam
si concipiunt.
liceat modo vivere ista que faciunt
m. medianibus, W.
n. partum, P, partu, Iuv.
159
urtica vicium quod pungit cor ne-
potes Remi et Romuli filios
traditur ecce ecce urtica que pungit
eos quia traditur viro clarus quia
posset esse ignobilis et ideo non
tam moleste esse ferendum subdit
clarus genere sed quia ad hoc pos-
set deflecti cogente paupertate, et
ideo non posset tanto vicio ascribi,
id est addit
atque opibus nec galeam id est non
ostendis signum in re. Rome erat
imago Martis galeam habens in ca-
pite, et in manu cuspidem ; quando
autem faciebant Romani, unde ad
iram Mars provocabatur. Ad si-
gnum ire sue movebatur, et dabat
fragorem galea in capite et cuspide
terram pulsabat patri id est i<m>-
perii i ut eos fluminet < sic > < vade
ergo quandoquidem talia sunt ; et
tu : non ostendit te iratum ergo
vade ac iugeribus Severi Campi id
est Marcii. Martium campum vocat
Severum quia ibi desidens, et cum
in utilitate agere solebant officium
cras dixerat virum viro credi ; sed
posset aliquis ab eo querere quo
modo hoc sciret ? Ad hoc dicit se
hoc audisse a quodam rustico, qui
retulit illud cuidam vicino suo ipso
audiente, et ponit verba rustici col-
loquentis officium inquit ille in
valle Quirini qui locus est iuxta
Romam que causa officii verba alte-
rus rustici quid queris verba nar-
rantis, nubit nubere proprie mulie-
rum est liceat modo verba sunt
i. iperii, P.
k. fluminet, ut vid.
160 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
in oculto, fiant a me palam ° ; a
parte a me reprehendentur, et sic
reprehendam istud actum ut cetera
vivere sic a paucis multum hoc
sciri. Dicit Iuvenalis modo fiunt
ista oculta quia tot et tales habe-
bant socios in hoc vicio, quod
aperte illi faciant istorias et alias
res gestas. In his gloriabant, ut de
quadam probitavit P
sed melius nil indulget iuris id est
potestatis natur<e > q in corpore,
<< animis » id est iuxta animas et
voluntatem earum. Noluit natura
quod parearent, quia natura instituit
quod femina que pregnans est nisi
fuerit mari carnaliter copulata vive-
re non possit, nam fragilitatem
ipsius oportet ad calorem maris
cohitu provocare. Hec glosa dubia
est ; vel oportet homines mori qui
conceperunt quondam contra natu-
ram . piscide lide hoc est sortale-
gium r mulierum, quod quoniam
steriles sunt ponunt araneam in
pixide, diversis aromatibus condi-
tam, quam habunt seg ... dum. †
Coheunt ut concipiant, sed hoc non
posset valere succubis. Pixes Grece,
buxus est quia Latine, unde pixis
vas est factum de < buxo > s, quo
mulieres ponunt sua ung<u >entat,
et illis non prodest
prebere palmas Lupercus dicitur
Pan. Ille deus quasi arcens lupos
et sic vocatur illius sacerdos, dicens
<< agilis » quia saltando faciebat festa
Panis. Steriles vero mulieres ad
hunc vementes porrigebant palmas,
o. a me ante palam expunxi.
p. probitavit, sic cod.
q. natura , W.
r. sortilegium (used here as a third
declension adjective with mulierum).
s. buxi, W.
t. nngenta, W.
Iuvenalis quasi diceret « modo in
abscondito hec faciunt, sed adhuc
eadem palam facient », vel ista que
ipsi modo celant in acta id est inter
acta aliorum in analibus interea tor-
mentum ita nubent aliis alii sed
interea dum sic agunt ingens tor-
mentum
sed melius ipsi, quod vellent parere
sed melius quia natura hoc eis negat
animis voluptatibus iuris quia non
ius ut potestatem habent a natura
ut possunt secundum ipsam operari
in corpore
et illis turgida tangit quiddam quod
solebant mulieres facere ut concipe-
rent. Accipiebant enim araneam, et
poneba<n >t¹ etiam in pixide cum
unguento, et habebant pixidem illam
in coitu, ut hoc modo conciperent.
Sed dicit Iuvenalis quod hoc viris
nubentibus non prodest Lide id est
araneam. Agragne dicta est Lide
quia de Lidia fuit, et quia a Pallade
in aragneam mutata est. Hinc po-
nitur pro Aragnea prodest etc Pan
deus pecudum, Lupercus dicitur
quasi arcens † <pecud >es † m vel
per antefrasim parcens lupis. Sed
Lupercus < non est > † " nomen
Panos sed sacerdotis illius ; sacer-
1. ponebat, P.
m. pecudes, coni.
n. non est, coni.
 IN SATIRAM 2.136-146
quibus inspuebant et quedam
magna verba dicebant, ut sic conci-
perent ; sed nichil valet hoc illis
vicit hic notat Neronem de eodem
vitio, cum enim cepit quendam nobi-
lem de genere Grecorum, fecit eum
currere in gladiat <u>ra▾ in qua
soli dampnati currebant. Hoc fecit
ut corpus eius libere aspiceret, id
est velocitatem et vires notaret. Et
hic fuscina instrumentum est gla-
diatoris, enim gladiator deferebat
fuscinam ad repellandum, retia ad
impediendum, gladium ad † <vin-
cen >dum † w
tunicati quia in tunica pugnabant
monstrum quod vir vi maius est illo
v. gladitora, W.
w. vincendum, conieci.
161
doti vero illius < porrigeb >-
ant sacerdotes manus suas osten-
dere et facere ipsum int ... one, †
t ... quia credebant [ eum ] hoc
modo eis inde concipiendi posse t ...
t ... Ergo solebant mulieres, ita
patici modo faciebant ut possent
concipere, sed nihil proficiebat agili
quia semper est in m ... † diu in
sacrificiis est 24
vicit etc in hoc loco reprehendit
Iuvenalis Neronem quo cum in gla
diatura soli ignobiles et † < dam-
nati > + O pugnare debent quemdam
leccatorem suum contra n<obi-
lem > † Romanum ad gladiaturam
coegerat ut videret mot <um > eius,
et placeret ei super illo. Vel secun-
dum alios ad hoc cogerat eum ideo
in gladiatura quod non erat consue-
tum . Et ita nobiles magis sub
pedibus haberet sed quaconque de
causa hoc fecerat, vicium erat, et
hoc tangit in hoc loco fuscina ins-
trumentum gladiatoris
lustravitque fuga per hoc quod dicit
ipsum fugisse ostendit eum peiorem
partem assumpsisse quia in gladia-
tura unus precedebat, alter seque-
batur, sed precedens peiorem habet
partem. Sed quia Grecus ille igno-
bilis posset esse, et ideo non esset
molestum ferendum ; ostendit eum
nobilem, dicens Capitolinis genero-
sior qui nobilissimi fuerant Romani
et Fabiis illis aliis Pauli minoribus
due familie nobilissime erant Rome
quarum quedam dicebantur Pauli
minores et, quod a per singula nar-
rem, etiam generosior t ... †
24. Codex caret verbis et est imperfectus.
o. damnati, conieci.
p. nobilem, conieci.
q. quid (?), P.
11
162 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
ad podium nobiles stabant aspicien-
tes ludos. Diceret aliquis non eum
generosior<em > x omnibus illis
quia ibi erat Nero, et ideo subiun-
gerat
munere misit illius gladiature retia
ad impediendum senatorem, et per
hoc innuit Neronem qui muneribus
ad hoc illum coegit.
esse aliquos diceret aliquis 39 << non-
ne qui patrem faciunt credere esse
penas in Inferis ? » Respondetur
<< quia nec etiam pueri. » G ... Legi-
tur in fabulis quod senex Coron
quadam <subti >lity et fragili
navicula anima<s > Ꮓ mortuorum
ad inferos tranportabat. Cuius hec
est veritas : Coron est tempus
quasi cronorum quod interpretatur
tempus, unde senex et filius
† p ... lidemi † qui interpretatur mul-
ta sapientia 40. Dicitur quia in seni-
bus auget sapientia et a antiquis
prudentia. Caron igitur animas
transportat quia tempus animas in
alias ultra hanc vitam ducit et in
39. Cf. Servius, In Aeneidem 6. 273 , 295,
403.
40. Cf. Fulgentius, Mythologiae, pref.;
Virgiliana continentia, p . 98.
x. generosior, W.
y. subtili, conieci.
z. animam, W.
ad podium id est comotis nobilibus
quia illi soli stabant ad podium, sed
ipso Nerone ostendit eum nobi-
liorem his licet etc id est motu et
voluntate vel munere quia ab ipso
Nerone munus accepit ideo ut gla-
diator pugnaret retia misit nota
quod uterque pugnancium in gla-
diatura, inde secundum quosdam, et
rete habebat quo socium impediret
et fuscinam qua impeditum inter-
ficerat. Secundum hanc sententiam
sic leges misit pro assumpsit. Alii
dicunt quod ille fugiens fuscinam
solus habebat, ille qui sequebatur
rete quo fugientem impediret et
ensem ad occidendum impeditum.
Secundum hoc leges misit pro dimi-
sit, quia Nero iuserat eum dimitere
rete et accipere fuscinam, quia
volebat quod peiorem haberet par-
tem et occideretur
esse aliquos manes ostendit in hoc
loco Iuvenalis Romanos ad tantam
molem viciorum devenisse ut non
crederent infernum esse, nec se pro
malefactis in Inferno puniendos .
< Ostendit > r contum , perticam
Carontis, qua < cumbam > s suam
traducit
r. ostendit scripsi.
s. cinbam, P.
 IN SATIRAM 2.147-158
hac fragili et subtili cumba, id est
corpore humano, tot a t ... sibus t
consuta, quod alentibus constat.
Hec predicta non credunt.
Aliqui manes Mos fuit antiquorum
pueros infra septenarium annum
non ire ad balnea sed domi a nutri-
cibus lavari. Et post vero septimos
annos ibant ad balnea et dato ere
lavabantur ab eluetoribus. Innuit
ergo iam quod pueri dum a nutri-
cibus balneantur credebant predicta
esse ut audiebant nutrices predicare,
sed postquam exibant ad balnea
tantum corrumpebantur <a>a
eluetoribus quod non credebant illa
esse
sed tu quasi diceret << quicquid
isti credebant » inde puta hec vera :
scilicet inferos et predicta esse, et
hic probat auctor, dico : puta vera
esse vere
quid Curius ille optimus et ambo
Scipiade avus et nepos et manes
Camilli illius optimi qui ex aratro
est translatus et factus est consul
et Cannis Canna est fluvius iuxta
quam Hannibal tot Romanos occidit
quod tres < modios > b anulorum
inde habuit, et tamen soli nobiles
tunc dessarebant с < sic > annulos
hinc de nostra civitate vel de re-
gione vivorum talis id est causa
incertulad et coinquinata luxuria
humida laurus in hoc notat anti-
quum, sicut enim antiqui ubi vide-
rant vel < tetigebant > e aliquem
immundum accensa teda cum
< sulphure > f et humida fumiga-
a. a, scripsi.
b. modos, W.
c. i. e. deserebant.
d. incertula sic vid.
e. tetigerebat, W.
f. sulphuru, W.
163
quoniam nec credant < pueri >
lavantur Rome quedam balnea erant
in quibus pueri lavabantur, et da-
bant precium. Sed erat mos ut
infra septem annos pueri non irent
ad balnea, in domibus tamen pa-
trum a nutricibus lavabantur. In-
tendit autem auctor dicere quod
non sunt Rome qui credant infer-
num esse nisi pueri qui sunt infra
septem annos; et hoc dicit equipol-
lentum , dicens quod que enervat
vero etiam pueri credunt nisi qui
sed tuo aliquis puta vera predicta
esse
quid sentit id est credit verum esse
Curius ille probus homo et ambo
Scipiade avunculus et nepos legio
Cremere legio scilicet a Hannibale,
apud Tremeram devicta
et Cannis iuventus apud Cannos
Hannibal tot Romanorum interfecit,
quod de solis anulis mortuorum im-
pletus est modius, cum non defer-
rent anulos nisi nobiles bellorum id
est bellantium vel anime bellorum,
id est bello affectarum quotiens
hinc talis id est bona ad illos , id est
malos cuperent illi mali purgari id
est lustrari si qua etc modum pur-
gationis antiquorum ostendit.
Antiqui enim post peccatum su<l >-
furat et tedas incendebant, et per
t. subfura, P.
164 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM
bant se, et sic credebant se purgari,
et non tantum isti credebant, sed
etiam
illic traducimur omnes enim ad
mortem properamus, non omnes sic
ad inferos trahimur et vita nostra
est tam brevis
Iuverne illius fluvii qui est in ulti-
mis partibus mundi et ultra Orcadas
illas insulas, modo id est nuper
captas a nobis ; in parte Britannie
que continet Galliam et vicinas
insulas, non habetur nox nisi brevis
circa festum Beati Johannis, neque
dies circa Natale <m > g. Nos has
gentes devicimus sed tamen illis
deteriores sumus, et hoc est sed que
nunc nos h victores et hoc est quos
vicimus, ut nubat vir cum viro et
quamvis dicam victos hic bene
facere, tamen a modo facient quia
hic discent a nobis quod ostendit
in uno Armenio scilicet
Zalaces qui eo missus esset obses
Romam, ab uno tribuno Romano-
rum est corruptus, et hoc est tamen
ephebis iuvenibus, et ita ad illud
officium habilior sese indulsisse ut
iuxta voluntatem eo abutitur
aspice quid faciant commercia ter-
rarum , scilicet unde gens aliam
corrumpit, ut ronptu , per istum
< Armenium. > Deinde subiungit
ad quod venerat, iste Romam sci-
g. natale, W.
h. hos pro nos (?).
i. ronptu, ut vid.
k. Armenes, W.
fumum putabant purgari a peccato,
etiam cum lauro aspergebant se
aqua et hoc erat aliud purgationis
genus. Et per hec vero purgatio-
num genera designabant peccata
igni et aque esse punienda
illic heu dixerat quotiens hinc talis,
id est bona umbra venit ad malos.
Ad hoc diceret aliquis << descen-
duntne bone umbre ad inferos ? »
Ad hoc respondetur « etiam omnes,
et cum omnes illuc traducituri, quid
prodest nobis tot et tanta fecisse ?
et tot subiugasse populos ? » Et
hoc est arma quidem ultra Iuverne
civitas est ... † per mare modo id
est noviter cautas et Orcadas pro-
prium nomen loci et minima conten-
tos nocte Britannos non per totum
annum sed circa festum Beati
Johannis quia fit obliquitate hemis-
perii, et cum sol ex hac parte eis
occidit sine mora ex alia parte eis
oritur, vel minima quia parvo se
pene reficit. sed que nunc populi
ita nos alios vincimus et tamen
peiores sunt victores victis sed
tamen quamvis extremos dicam
liberos a viciis, tamen quidam eorum
ex eo, quod hic inter nos conver-
santur, viciosi efficiuntur et hoc
probat per quemdam Zelacem Arme-
nium qui tribunum possederat
mollior sese exphebis extraneis
ardet eius amore
commercium quod commutatio est
mercium sed hic ponitur pro com-
mutatione terrarum hic id est Rome
fiunt homines vel hironice dictum
sit vel hic fiunt homines viciosi. Et
 IN SATIRAM 2.158-170
licet obses pro pace servanda ab
Armenis hic etc nunc vituperat
aperte imperator<em>1 Rome di-
cens hic, id est Rome, fiunt homines
immo sodomice et subiungit quo-
modo nam si mora longior com-
paratus pro posituro indulsit pueris,
id est pueri diu morantur in in urbe
non umquam derit amator id est
corrumptum. Subiungit quomodo
corrumpantur, scilicet mutando mu-
nere frena flagellum quia talibus
delectantur pueri. Quidam legant
<< mittentur » pro dimitantur, ista
que ad viros pertinent, quia sodo-
mite cogunt suos succobos virilia
dimittere et muliebra accipere, et
sic pueri corrupti a nostris , pretex-
tatos, id est Romanos. Pretexta
enim genus est vestimenti quo ute-
bantur soli Romani;
Axtaxata ad illum locum Armenie,
per quem omnia loca extranea et
peregrina intelligit.
1. imperator, W.
165
vere hi fiunt hic, scilicet subster-
nuntur, nam si pueri aliquantulum
in hac urbe morentur statim leca-
tores efficiuntur Et hoc est
nam si mora mitentur ab ipsis ama-
toribus paticis ; bracce et cetera
puerilia dona que enerva<n >t▾ vel
mitentur id est dimituntur ab ipsis
pueris bracce ut paratiores sint ad
ponendum et dimituntur etiam
omnia gestamina virorum ut puelle
sint consimiles et eneva < n >t w ges-
tamina virum, ... cultelli frena sic
Artaxata loca Armenie referunt Ro-
manorum pretexatos id est nobiles.
Yronice dicit pretexatos quasi dice-
ret hic alienigenis exuncti conver-
satione provenit, quod cum viciosi
non sint, apud nos efficiuntur.
v. enervat, P.
w. enervat, P.
x. perhaps alienigenis is here being used
as a genitive singular with exuncti.
 < GLOSAE IN IUVENALIS SATIRAM TERTIAM >

Quamvis digressu 25 In hac satira reprehendit Iuvenalis illos apud quos

vilescunt dediti sapientie, quia illis volunt adulari, quod tali eventu et
casu facit . Unbricius quidam amicus suus erat qui a Roma recedebat
propter varietatem viciorum que ibi viderat, et Cumas tendebat apud
quas se permansurum proposuerat, quia vacue erant a tumultu populi.
Et conducebat eum Iuvenalis et quesivit ab eo causas sui discessus , quas
ille ei enarrando multa Romanorum vicia commemorat, de quibus legendo
literam dicemus. Antequam vero ponat verba Unbricii, commendat dis-
cessum eius a Roma tum ex hoc loco quem ad habitandum sibi elegerat,
tum ex illo quem fugiebat ; sic leges : ego sum < confusus > y pre dolore
digressu veteris amici Umbricii. Nota quod dicit <«< veteris amici » , ut
amiciciam conmendet. Ut enim ait Tullius : vetus amicitia preciosor est,
cito namque possumus incipere amare sed, nova amicitia cito muta
mutatur 26, tum ex honorum provectione, tum ex loci mutatione et ex
multis aliis. Veterem vero amicitiam nullum istorum mutat, tantumdem
est ergo quod dicit , ac si diceret « veteris » , id est « preciossimi amici ».
Et quamvis sim confusus laudo tamen etc vacuis a viciis vel ab habita-
tionibus. Cume civitas est in quam Sibilla vaticinata est. Sibille Sibil-
lave urbe z Ianua Baiarum commendat digressum eius per topografiam id
est descriptionem loci ad quem tendebat. Dicit ergo quod Cume est ianua
Baiarum. Baie secundum quosdam civitas est multum delectabilis , secun-
dum alios portus amenissimus. Et in introitu Baiarum erat Cume. Dicens
Cuman Ianuam et introitum Baiarum notat delectationem loci, et sunt ille
Cume gratum litus ameni id est Baiarum, que sunt quidam secessus, quasi
deorsum cessus, quia extra viam peregrinantium sunt ego vel Prochitam
< commendatio > a dicessus eius per amenitatem loci ad quem tendebat,
commendat etiam inprobando locum a quo recedebat Prochitam vilissima
villa est Subure vicus est Rome et ponit partem pro toto et est sinedoche
nam quid tam miserum ecce qua ratione quamlibet vilissimam villam

25. Usque ab Satira Tertia ad Satiram Sextam (finem) ms. P solum Glosas Wilelmi
testificatur.
26. Cicero, De amicitia 19. 67.
y. confumsus, P.
z. sibillave urbe, lectio incerta.
a. commendatum, P.
 IN SATIRAM 3.1-14 167

Rome preponat miserum quantum ad divicias solum quantum ad habita-

torem incendia domorum et August recitantis in Augusto mense colle-
gerant Romani segetes suas et, cum horrea eorum et cellaria erant plena,
et maiorem fertilitatem habebant quam in alio mense ; poete vero adeo
paupertate cogebantur ut in Augusto, quo tempus erat fertilius, non
haberant ; unde paupertati sue subvenirent sed eo tempore sicut in aliis
mendicabant et recitando victum comparabant. Hoc igitur loco vicium
Romanorum notat et istud materie dicit ergo nihil peius quam horrere
poetas recitantis id est poetarum paupertatem quam mendicare in fer-
tiliori tempore patiebantur sed dum tota domus qua occasione Unbricius
ad narrationem venerit ; ostendit una reda per hoc notat eum pauperem
et paucis contentum et modestum, et non querentem nisi quod nature
veterium est veteres arcus locus est iuxtab Romam Capenam locus
similiter iuxta Romam. < Capenam > quidam ita < arcus > quam
madidam vocat quia fontibus habundabat hic ubi nocturne iam superius
prelibavimus Numam Pompilium, post Romulum statim Romanum
obtinuisse imperium. Romulus vero bellicosus homo, et efferus fuerat, et
Romanorum corda bellis et rapinis assuefecerat, quia sepe fit ut discipuli
magistros redoleant. Numa Pon<pilius >, magnus pacis amator, Roma-
norum corda sub Romulo facta effera ad pacem et concordiam revocare
studebat. Finxerat itaque quod nimphera quedam eum diligebat, scilicet
Egeria, et de nocte apud Capenam cum eo loquebatur, et ipsa modum quo
se Romani habere deberent docebat eum ; dicebatque ille Numa Romanis
sic nos habete, quia sic rogat Egeria, cui Romani quasi precepta nimphe
edicenti credebant " . Et pallatim eius precepta sequenda ad pacis con-
cordiam procedebant, et inde est quod auctor dicit constituebat id est
colloquebatur ; quia constituo tibi tandem est quantum colloquor tibi
nocturne amice Egerie de nocte nunc sacri fontis ecce Romanorum notatur
avaricia. Capena nemus sacum est, et Capene fontes sacri habebantur,
quia ibi et Nume et Egerie et aliorum deorum colloquia credebantur esse.
Nefas vero erat loca deorum vel sacrificiis vel collocutionibus
s<e >creta d locare. Est enim consuetudo inter Iudeos ut nullus eorum
cum muliere menstruata, antequam menstrua purgarentur et aqua ablue-
rentur, rem habeat ; qua de re Iudei in quibuscumque locis sint : aut
super aquam habitant, aut habent domum super aquam precio, aut quo
modo comparatam in qua Iudee se vadent purgare. Iudei vero qui Rome
erant super aquam nequaquam habitabant, Capaena quia aquis abundabat .
A Romanis conduxerant, et erant ibi frequentes Iudeorum purgationes, et
hoc vicium notat quorum cophinum fenumque supellex In veteri lege
dictum legis Iudeis , septima die festa ce < le >brabitis sabatum requi<e >-
tionis e est. Omne scilicet opus servile non facietis in eo, quod Iudei ad

27. Cf. Livius, Ab urbe condita 1. 18-25.

b. iusta, P.
c. ante quidam lectio corrupta est, scripsit Numum ; conieci Capenam ; arcus scripsi,
auctum ut vid. in codice.
d. sacreta, P.
e. cebrabitis , P ; requisitionis, P ; Lev. 23. 32 : « Sabbatum requietionis est, et affligetis
animas vestras die nono mensis : a vespera usque ad vesperam celebrabitis sabbata vestra ».
168 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

literam observantes nullum opus servile faciunt. Opus vero dicunt servile
opus esse, preter orationibus instare, et pueris mammas prebere, et come-
dere. Et huius modi die vero Perasceve, quod ante sabatum proximum
est, coqunt ea que accepturi sunt in sabato. Antiquitus vero Iudei in
Perasceve escas addunt ad focum ut usque in crastinum calorem suum
conservarent et feno involuebant, et in cophino reponebant. Et inde est
quod hic legis cofinum fenumque suppellex modo vero habant foveas
subterraneas in quibus conservant cibos calidos usque in sabbatum omnis
enim probatio est a maiori, quod locantur sacri fontes et delubra ; quia
etiam alia quibus minus precium comparatur omnis arbor omnis locus
in quo solebant esse arbores populo Romano pendere id est solvere
mendicat adquirit precium eiectis Camenis id est poetis, vel poetarum
musis que dicuntur Camene quasi cane ne, id est canentes amene. Poete
enim in silvis habitare et studere solebant, et ubi habitatio est poetarum
ibi dicitur poetarum musa esse dico, quia musarum alie sunt poetice, alie
philosophice. In libro quod Bo<etius > De consolatione dicit : ite sirenes
usque in exitum dulces increpans musas poeticas, et relinquire hunc meis
musis curandum 28. dissimiles veris non naturales scilicet sed artificiales.
Vocatque veras naturales speluncas dicat loca fontium canales, quas ipsi
Romani fecerant marmoreas et ex superfluitate divitiarum. Sed illud
artificium Romanorum improbat Iuvenalis, subdens < quanto > f pres-
tancius thophus secundum quosdam est lapis minutissimus qui subest
aquis. Secundum alios terra dura et alba que similiter subest aquis, sed
sive hoc, sive illud sit. Thophum < sic > violabant marmora que eis
superponita erant Ingenuum id est naturale hic tunc Umbricius facta
digressione, ad intentionem descendit Iuvenalis et verba Umbricii, disces-
sus sui causis enarratis, ponit emolumentum proprie est remuneratio mole
que datur custodi molendini. Sed hoc pro qualibet remuneratione ponitur
et est sensum emolumentum id est retributiones ubi Dedalus alas fabula
de Dedalo satis nobis notista & est, quo modo scilicet Minos clausum eum
et filium Icarum tenuit in carcere, et quomodo au<x >ilioh alarum cum
filio auffugit, et decidit filius in mare et ipse usque ad Cumas volavit, et
ibi pennas deposuit. Dicit ergo propositum est illuc ubi Dedalus etc.
dum nova ostendit tempus discessioni congruum, quia adhuc se sustinere
potest et nunc primum incipit canescere dum superest Lachesi Tres
dicuntur esse sorores apud inferos, que humanam vitam dispensant.
Prima est Cloto, secunda Lachesis, tertia Atropos. Prima banilat colum,
secunda extrahit filum, tertia occat, id est rumpit filum. De his habet
fabula, quod quamdiu Lachesis a suo non cessat officio, sed habet quod
torqueat, tam diu vita hominis durat. Postquam vero Atropos suum
exercet officium statim vita hominis finem habet. In rei veritate tres
iste sorores humane vite ordinem exprimunt. Unde et nomina figure
congruunt : Cloto enim evocatio, Lacesis sors, Atropos sine conversione

28. Boethius, De Consolatione philosophiae 1. 1 .

f. grato, P.
g. notista, ut vid. forsitan notitia.
h. ausilio, P.
 IN SATIRAM 3.14-34 169

interpretatur. Sed primum homo evocatur de non esse ad esse, unde

etiam primo est Cloto. Huic congruit quod colum bajulat quia sicut filum
a colo sic vita nostra a generatione principium habet. Secunda est
Lachesis eo quod nascentem hominem sors et fortune inconstantia
suscipiat. Ipsa producendo filum vitam hominis dispensat, quia vita et
actus nostri varie subiacent mutabilitati. Extrema est Atropos quia
extrema hominis sine conversione sunt, hominis enim extrema mors, de
qua ad vitam non est retrogradatio, quia orta caro moritur, mortua non
oritur. Atropos ergo, que figurat mortem filum occando, vite hominis
finem imponit. Aliam etiam huic argumento fidem subesse invenimus ;
actuum enim nostrorum quidam sunt futuri, quidam presentes, quidam
preteriti. Cloto itaque nostros actus futuros figurat quia illi de non esse
ad esse evocantur. Presentes figurat Lachesis quia illi sorti et subite
mutationi subiacent. Atropos vero preteritos actus figurat, quia illi sine
conversione sunt actus, enim noster preteritus non est iterum futurus ;
tandem ergo est quod hic dicit dum superest Lachesis quod tarqueat ac
si diceret dum adhuc vita mea durat ; bacillo diminutium est a baculo, quia
illi qui pregravantur, opus est baculo ad surgendum qui nigrum vertunt
qui bonum dicunt malum et malum bonum quis facile conducere Rerum
alie sunt private, alie sunt generales, alie puplice. Private sunt sue
uniuscuiusque ; generales que multis aut omnibus populis sunt communes :
multis ut Secana 29, omnibus ut sol, aer, et huius modi ; Puplice que unius
civitatis tantum populo sunt communes ut erat capitolium Romanis.
Privatas res licet nobis locare, generales vero et puplicas nequaquam
sicut neque Romanis licebat ; et tamen omne licitum transgredientes,
puplica locabant et generalia locabant, enim capitolium, flumina, portus.
Et hoc vicium eorum notat Umbricius hoc loco his verbis quis facile etc
et est sensus. Maneant Rome illi quibus est facile conducere capitolium.
Nota differentiam inter « conducere » et « locare » ; conducunt illi qui cum
precio ducunt; locant illi qui precium accipiunt. Sed et hii et illi pari
sentencia ferentur, iccirco et hos et illos reprehendit. Illud ergo quis
referes addantes precium flumina ut possint ibi piscari portus ut trans-
ferant homines siccandam eluvium Eluviem dicit sordes domorum vel
cenum quod in stabulo equorum erat, quod Romani aubsque < sic >
precio non dimitebant siccandam purgandam portandum ad busta Rome
officium erat quorundam portare mortuos ad busta, et inde multa lucra-
bantur. Sed nec hoc dimitebant Romani absque precio et prebere caput
domina legitur in Salustrio quod Metellus dum contra Iugurtam duceret
exercitum, propter negotium quoddam revocatus a Romanis Romam
reversus est, et exercitum usque dum rediret Aulo fratri suo dimisit 30.
Ille vero interim aliquid laudabile volens facere, exercitum produxit contra
Iugurtam Iugurta vero omnium cautissimus exercitum inclusit. Et
inclusum cum iam nullam viam salutis speraret, tali conditione dimisit ut
omnes insignum servitutis sub hasta sua transirent. Unde postea habuit
Romanorum consuetudo quod qui servus alicuius vellet fieri, sub hasta

29. Secana - the Seine River ; Histoire littéraire de France, 30. 573.
30. C. Sallustius Crispus , Bellum Iugurtinum .
170 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

eius transiret. Tantumdem ergo est quod dicit hasta ac si diceret >
quibus est facile serv <u >si fieri ; fiebant autem quidam Rome servi ut
hoc modo ditarentur quondam hi cornices hii scilicet tales qui predicta
conducunt Rome et inde ditati sunt quondam erant Cornices officium
quod vile est et municipales id est munus capientis, et est compositum
municipales a munere et capiendo gladiatura vocat harenam municipalem
quia inde quod pugnabant munera accipiebant ; per hoc erga quod dicit
eos comites harene municipalis notat eos fuisse ignobiles, quia in gladia-
tura soli ignobiles pugnare solebant noteque bucce quia precones fuerant,
vel garrulitate nocuerant, et illi qui tales erant modo ditati sunt apud
Romam et nunc edunt id est donant munera verso pollice id est quam
brevi spacio vertes pollicem. Occidunt quemlibet vulgus id est populariter,
id est coram populi inde reversi ab occisione alicuius de vulgo conducunt
foricas mercatoria sunt in quibus merces venduntur, que quando in bona
parte civitatis sunt multo locantur. Talia faciunt isti et quid non facerent,
hec omnia ? cum sint tales locari quia hic est ludus Fortune : modo
extollere modo deprimere, unde hec [ eguis ] verba in Boethius De conso-
latione legis : hunc continuum ludum ludimus, rotam volubili orbe
rotamus ; infima summis, summa infimis, mutare gaudemus 31.
nescio poscere motus astrorum id est nescio me fingere divinatorem, est
enim divinatio quedam in astris funus promittere patris quidam leccatores
erant Rome qui ut placerunt pueris ad aliquid extorque<n > dum ab eis,
dicebant alicui eorum « † ba ... † quam fortunatus es, pater enim tuus infra
mensem morietur. Et obtinebis eius hereditatem » sed hic iste Unbricius
dicit se nescire ranarum viscera Modus divinationis alius a predicto, vel
sit modus veneficii sed quicquid illud sit, id sibi aufert, notans tamen illud
esse in Romanis, sicut et alia omnia que sibi aufert mittit quantam ad
nummum mandat quantam ad verba fur aliene uxoris atque ideo quia nec
scio nec possum nec volo predicta facere comes nulli corpus extincte dextre
id est tamquam si exterior esset dextra mea et ego inutilis et nullius precii
qui nunc diligitur Rome nisi conscius sed quia bonorum posset conscius,
subdit et cui fervens . Verri per Verrem accipe omnem furem, quia vero
posset Iuvenalis Umbricio dicere se bene esse tacendorum conscium, et ita
apud Romam diligi et ditari tunc ab illo cuius peccati conscius esset, et ab
aliis qui ipso mediante aliquid inpetrare vellent. Iccirco ab hoc eum
dissuadet Umbricius his verbis non sit tibi tanti harena. ut careas
sompno quo equidem careres si aliquis nequicie Romanorum conscius
esset, quia peccati alterius conscius est ; ipse gaudet se ab eo timeri et
semper cogitat quo modo ab eo possit extorquere, et numquam sine cura
est Tagus fluvius est habens harenas aureas, et dicitur opacus vel quia
tinguntur ripe eius arboribus , vel propter aureas harenas que visum
obscurant. Vel propter cupiditatem auri que omnes excecat, aurum
quodque volvitur quia fert secum Tagus inpetu suo harenas suas in mare
et sumas premia vel ab illo cuius criminis erit conscius, vel ab his qui de

31. Boethius, De consolatione philosophiae, 2. 2.

i. servos, ut vid.
 IN SATIRAM 3.35-70 171

aliquo nolent apud ipsum inpetrare premia ; dico ponenda id est

depo<nenda > , quandoque saltem in morte ; et tu, dico tristis quia ali-
quando te hec depositurum scies et timearis amico id est adiuv<er >ek ;
malum est timeri ab amico, quia timetur ab eo alicuius illius nequitie est
conscius, propter quam ille timet eum, et malum est esse conscius cri-
minis que nunc << amice » ait Iuvenalis « ego Roma discedens omnes
fugio. Sed maxime > illud tibi dicam » non possum ecce quos maxime
fugiat Quirites dicti sunt Romani a Romulo qui Quirinus dicebatur a
quiris, quod est hasta, vel quia semper hastacus incedebat, vel quia
hastacus in Aventino monte floruerat. Vocant ergo leges Quirites sic
O Quirites Romani Grecam urbem Grecos in urbem quamvis quota portio
quota quandoque per se ponitur, et tantundem valet quot ; parva est
ergo sensus : Non possum ferre Grecos in urbe quamvis pauci sint ; pauci
dicit ad comparationem aliorum advenarum . Unde subdit iam pridem
enervat advenas qui apud Romam venerant, ut illorum comparatione
liqueat paucos esse Archivos. Orontes fluvius est in Siria Tiburis fluvius
est Rome tantundem est ergo quod dicit Tiburis defluxit Orontes < etc >
illi de Siria Romam advenerunt linguam Siriacam et mores gentis Sirie
et cum tibicine quia antequam Siri Romam advenerunt non audierant
Romani tibicinem , nec erat apud eos instrumentum tibicinis obliquas
dicit, quia obliqua positas gentilia agente sua reperta circum theatrum
prostare pro precio stare, quia non erant Rome mulieres venales, ante-
quam Siri advenerunt, sed illi docuerunt eas habere prostibula. Vel potest
quod secum advexerunt mulieres quas prostare faciebant iuxta theatrum ;
ille alias docuerunt ad modum earum facere. Et quandoquidem hodie
prostant mulieres ad theatrum, ego cedo a theatro, et a Roma. Sed nos
ite ad theatrum quibus grata picta lupa lupam vocat meretricem quia
vorax est et rapax ad modum lupe picta mitra ornamentum est meretri-
cium rusticus ille tuus non tantum advexit predicta Romam Sirus Oruntes ,
sed etiam doctrinam Sirorum rusticus tuus aquirite¹ Quirinus vocat Romu-
lum qua causa diximus, Rusticum eius vocat populum Romanum, quia sub
Romulo adhuc rustici et rudes erant Romani rechedipne muliebra vesti-
menta sunt quibus > m edocti a Siris abutebantur Romani et ceromatico
ceroma unguentum est quod fit ex cornu cervi ad extirpandos pilos . Illo
unguento, edocti a Siris, ungebant se Romane circa collum, vel ut auffe-
rent pilos si qui essent ; vel ut suaviter redolerent quia illud ungentum
bene redolet. Leges ceromatico id est ceromate inuncto nichetereia nicos
victus inde nichetereia victorie signa. Magnum quippe erat apud Romanos
esse de progenie victorum, et ideo illi qui de progenie victorum erant
nichetereia circa collum ferebant, insignum victorie non sue sed avorum
hic alta debebat Umbricius ostendere multitudinem advenarum ut compa-
ratione eorum liqueret paucos esse Grecos. Et ponens Siros in ennara-
tione priores addidit, etiam quos consuetudines secum advexissent. Nunc
redit ad ennarationem advenarum, dicens hic etc Hesquilie est extra

k. adiuve, P.
1. aquirite, ut vid., pro Quirine, Iuv.
m. qui, P.
172 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

Romam immundissimus, unde et nomen accepit, quia Hesquilie sunt

immundicie . Ad illum vicum divertebant advene quando primum Romam
veniebant, quia pauperum erat vicus ille. Secundum quosdam etiam pau-
peres ibi sepeliebantur et inde dicebatur vicus ille Hesquilie Escalionum ,
id est vermium collem dictum a vimine id est vimeneum collem scilicet
Aventinum qui vimine habundabat viscera secreta scilicet dispensatoris et
post t † domini ingenium velox est illi advene. Ingenium est naturalis
vis ad aliquid cito percipiendum, unde et ingenium dicitur quasi intus
genitum perdita vehemens et furibunda Iseus torrens est et quandoque
talis est ille advena, velocis scilicet ingenii, perdite audacie, prorupti ser-
monis ede dic quid putes esse quemvis hominem certe ipse est gramaticus.
aliptes curator vulnerum scenobates funambulus medicus in theoretica
omnia novit greculus id est advena ; greculus pauper et exuriens fingit se
nosse omnia etiam promitit se volaturum 32 ; et hoc est quod dicit in celum
et quid mirum si famelicus greculus promitit se facturum cum etiam
maiora legas de Grecis ? legis enim de Grecis quosdam volasse et hoc
est ad summam ad ultimum dico tibi , ne mireris cum audias Graeculum
promitendum se volaturum, quia ille qui volavit de media Grecia natus
erat, et tangit fabulam de Perseo sive de Dedalo quorum utrumque volasse
habet fabula, et uterque Grecus erat. conchilia conchile est piscis de
cuius sanguine commaculatur purpura. Unde hic ponit conchilia in hoc
sensu, id est commacul <i >ones vel conchilia id est immundas mores
quia conchile immundus pi <s >cis est me prior ille signabat mos erat
apud antiquos scribere primos heredes et secundos . Primi scribebantur
sine condicione, secundi cum conditione tali, si primus heres moreretur.
Inde dicit modo Umbricius ille Greculus signabit prior me, id est scribetur
heres ante me ; alii dicunt aliter : ille signat me priorem, id est si opus sit
ipsi et mihi sigillo imperatoris ; carta ipsius signabitur ante meam
fulcusque toro meliore recumbet qui si aliquis invitaverit me et ipsum
ad prandium primum et meliorem locum dabat ei adductus Romam
prima et coctana eo vento adducebantur Romam ut venderentur, et ipse
eodem vento adductus fuerat ut scilicet venderetur. Et per hoc notat
eum servum quia ibi adducebatur et est usualis loc<us > a hausit Aven-
tini celum id est ere Romanum sabina baca quia a Sabinis aponebantur
Romam Bacce Quicquam causam cause subiungit gens Grecorum est
prudentissima adulandi id est gracilem invalidi id est amici equat com-
parat Herculis in maiore virtute existentis quod ostendit per sequentia
Antheum Antheus fuit quidam gigas in Libia, terre fiilius cum quo luctatus
est Hercules, qui < quotiens > r terram tangebat vires ab ea resumebat,
quo agnito Hercules eum areptum inter levum latus et levum lacertum

32. Cf. Dragmaticon, pref. to Bk. 4.

n. commaculones , P ; coni. emendatum.
o. picis, P.
p. ali (post si ) expunxi.
q. locam , P.
r. quontiens, P.
 IN SATIRAM 3.71-128 173

vig<i >lavits, unde in Lucano huc Anthee cades 33. angustam id est gra-
cilem sonat cantat ut ille Iudei hec eadem antipophoram, que posset fieri,
ponit, quasi diceret illud idem licet nobis sed illis creditur nobis, autem
non nec mirum quod sciunt representare humanum gestum, et hoc est
an melior comedus ad quem pertinet representare gestus sustinet repre-
sentando Tayda pro<prium > nomen meretricis pro apelativo ponitum agit
representat Dorida id est ancillam et pro< prium > nomen cultam id est
nudam mulier bene dixit quia comedus melius non representat, quia ibi
proprie representat quia videtur ille loqui cuius gestum exprimit ; et hoc
est mulier etc persona representans ut dicas vacua vel a virilibus vel a
struma plana quemadmodum in muliere ventriculum ventum, a pectore
usque ad umbilicum est ; ventriculus ab unbilico ad inguen ; et dicas
distantia separata nec tamen sic continua : quamvis modo delectantur in
adulatoribus non tamen delectarentur in aliis antiquis, quia erant Latini
et hoc est nec tamen ubi apud eos Hemo proprium nomen vel Hemo pro-
nuntiatione vocis, unde premium; et dicitur Hemum mi<rabilem >, nec
mirum si creditur illis quia tota natio etc Andro duplex est vestis non
sumus ergo quandoquidem ille creditur nobis, autem non sumere id est
representare nocte dieque id est quotiens vivit a facie id est ante faciem
strulla id est servus aurei divitis levis inbrevis ante pudicus id est ante-
quam ille corruptor intraret resupinat investigat si qui ibi possit invenire
ocultum , unde timeatur et quantum etc gignasia adverbialiter posuit.
Gignus dicitur nudus, gignas gignadis lucta inter nudos, gigniteum ubi
nudi iacent, inde gignasia vocat scolas Stoicarum ubi nudi studebant
abolle sapientie, abolla enim vestis est philosophica Stoicus Eliodorum
signat occidit non gladio, sed de laceratione et hic vult sequens litteram
delato<r > et quia posset dici quod esset inimicus, subdit amicus ett
iterum quia posset dici quod erat iuvenis et indiscretus senex discipu-
lumque ripa per descriptionem ostendit unde natus de Grecia. Nota est
fabula. Pegasus divinus equus de sanguine Gorgonis natus fuit, qui
percu<t > it terram pede, et inde fons emanavit musis consecratus. Pro-
tegenes aliquis comparabilis huic leccatori qui non partitur id est qui
numquam alicui revelat secreta que novit ut solus timeatur vel qui non
id est qui nihil impartit amico et hoc ex vicio gentis sue stillat ad naturam
veneno respicit facilem ad credendum numquam minor quasi diceret nullum
da<m >num putat minus, quam amitere amicum. Iactura dicitur a
iacio iacis, et est da<m >num w nautarum, quando te<m >pestate coguntur
res suas in mare proicere officium id, est quod meritum < officii > y
blandiar id est parcam vobis pauperibus cum pretor reprehendit divites
Romanos quia cum paupers ali<qui > summo mane consurgerent ad salu-

33. Lucanus, Bellum civile 4. 649.

s. vigulavit, P.
t. et (post et') expunxi.
v. dagnum, P.
w. Ibid .
x. tespestate, P.
y. officium cii, P.
174 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

tandos divites ut invitarentur, divites mitebant servos suos qui ex parte

sua illos salutarent lictorem id est servum suum. Lictor autem proprie
dicebatur qui ante imperatorem securari deferebat, ita dico si togatus id
est pauper et cetera orbis id est orfanis collega collega dicitur qui ad idem
officium mititur cum aliquo in eadem legatione Albinam et Modiam illas
divites viduas divitis alia est causa sue discessionis, videlicet quia nobiles
quasi pauperes essent ; serviebant divitibus et ignobilibus claudit stipat
alter enim nec mirum, quia tantum alicui meretrici dat quantum dabatur
tribuno, ad aliquam legionem pascendam Calvine et Catiene nomina sunt
meretricum, in legione subintelligenda est pascenda, palpitet illam clunem
agitet ac tu quia pauperes hares ambigis dubitas Chionem proprium nomen
meretricis deducere advocare da testem alia causa sue discessionis, scilicet
quia pauperi Rome non creditur ; licet habet bonum testimonium et legi-
timos testes hospes Scipionem Nasicam designat. Legitur namque quia
quo tempore Cibele de Frigia adportaretur, quesitum est ab ea apud quem
Rome vellet remanere, quousque templum sibi fabricaretur. Et illa fertur
respondisse apud Scipionem Nasicam, vel Numa, sanctissimus imperator,
vel Claudium Apilum designat, quia dum templum Palladis arderet, irruit
per medium ignem et arripuit palladium necubi ureretur imprecans ; ut
si quid videret quod videre non liceret sibi, non urbi redderetur, itaque est
excecatus protinus licet in quem bonum habet testimonium, tamen quo-
rum primum de pecunia ; et hoc est protinus curriterz subaudit, et quam
parapside para<p >sis a dicitur scutellas habens pare auxides, id est
angulos quantum proverbium est « iures, o pauper » Samathracum Samii
et Traces aliquando e diversa in unam terram convenerunt, et ibi coha-
bitaverunt et vocata est terra Samotracia, populi vero Samotraces. Hii
dicuntur fuisse deorum cultores unde legitur de Enea cum Atrovia Romam
tenderet aras eorum asportasse nostrorum Romanorum Quid quasi diceret
<< quid dicerem de superdictis, quid etiam de hoc ? » calceus sotularis
cicatrix illud scilicet quod rupto sotulari superassurturb non in † ... † sed
multe linum filum crassum grassum atque recens non bene cerant vulnere
scissura nihil habet generale proverbium est inquit dives exeat pauper
si pudor equestri pulvino de sede equitum et dicitur pulvinum quasi plu-
minum a pluma legi Roscius Otho dedit legem ne aliquis sederet in eques-
tri ordine nisi haberet quadrigenta sextercia nummorum lenonum dicitur
consciliator stupri plaudat plaudendo sedeat nitidi divitis pinirapi pinni-
rapi vocantur gladiatores a rapio rapis, et pinno, quod est summitas : quia
de summitate armorum eorum quos vicerant, faciebant sibi philateria
laniste carnifices a laniendo vano qui vanam dedit legem distinxit divisit
quis gener alia causa quia Rome nullum pauperem heredem faciebant
quando subiungit et aliam quia pauperes non admitebantur secretis con-
siliis divitum edilibus ediles vocat custodes capitolini sive † con ... erarii † ;
agmine facto ad tacitam antipoforam fit responsio ; posset enim dici
<< quandoquidem pauperes sunt quare ergo non laborant ut se de paupertate

z. curriter, here used apparently for cursim.

a. parausis, P.
b. superassurtur ut vid.
 IN SATIRAM 3.128-193 175

eximant ? » Respondetur « quia difficile est ubique paupertati se eximere

sed gravius Rome » emergunt tractum est a naufrago qui mergitur et
postea emergit hospitium est conducendum frugi alicuis utilitatis fictilibus
alia causa quia ad tantum superfluitatem devenerant ut etiam pauperes
dedignarentur cenare fictilibus negabis Camillus : nomen tacet sed des-
criptionem ponit Marsos Marsia pars est Sabine cucullo veste rusticana
duro id est gresso pars magna quia locutus fuerat de fragilitate , ideo
accepta occasione eam commendat ; dicens eam observari in Etruria, et
hoc est togam pro veste aliquantulum ornata posuit si quando maiestas
reprehendit Romanos de assidua festorum celebritate ubi dicit
si quando herboso facto in campo non marmoreo sicut est Rome et per
hoc carpit Romanorum superfluitatem exodium id est cantus, qui precedit
odam et dicitur exodium quasi extra odam notum consuetum, et per hoc
reprehendit Ro <manos > quos nulla iuvabat cantilena nisi semel audita
pallentis larvate illic apud Etruscos orchestram orchestram vocat sedem
nobilium : orche Grece recipere latum, per orchestram accipit nobiles
hic ultra ita est illic sed hic id est Rome habitus id est vestimenti, et est
habitus participium commune pauperum et divitum ambitiosa deliciosa
vel supera quid das vere cum precio quia quid etc Cossum proprium
nomen Vegento quidam fuit dives qui adeo superbus erat, ut pauperibus
respondere dedignaretur ; unde dixit clauso ille item ostendit quia omnia
erant Rome cum precio, namque oportebat dari munera pro barba ton-
denda, et crine deponendo ; et hoc est et ille metit id est tondet ; precio
subaudit venalibus quia si aliquis ab aliquo velit libros mutari, oportet
prius precium dare, vel libis liba vocat placentas quasdam que cubitales
apellantur, quas dabant pro barbitondio quasi diceret « ipsi deponunt
crinem amici et barbam metunt et domus sua libis plena est » accipe
continuo ; hec audisti, audi et ista accipe id est audi fermentum id est
materiam et causam indignationis quia clientes prestare tributa id est
numinia dominis vel familiaribus dominorum cum ipsi deberent potius ab
eis accipere peculia id est pecuniam servis id est ministris cultis id est
bene ornatis vel servis id est dominis quis timet ostendit quot et quanta
Rome timeatur ; que alio non timentur ? Preneste civitas est ; nota quod
prius hoc Praeneste. Cur ergo dixit gelida ? Ad significatum respexit
Servius, tamen cum illius versus Vergiliani meminit : Qualis
† < eram > † ª cum prima acies Preneste sub ipsa 34, dixit hoc Preneste
opidum, hec Preneste civitas gelida propter fontes Volsiniis pluraliter
protulit nomen loci Gabiis apud Gabios simplicibus parvo sumptu contentis
vela... icio † vacuis Tiburis opidum est proni quia in latere montis sit
colimus et nota quod hoc verbum colo multas habet significationes ; dixi-
mus enim colo domini, adoro ; colo hominem , diligo ; colo terram, aro ;
colo urbem, habito vel frequento ; tibicine id est furta et nota quod Cor-
nutus super hunc locum dicit hec tibicinis, huius tibicinis pro furca, non

34. Servius, In Aeneidem 8. 561.

C. alii (?) , P.
d. post qualis illegibile.
176 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

tamen alibi se invenisse tenui id est gracili nam sic bene dixit furcam
quia hoc modo obstat labentibus domibus vel aliter obstat labentibus id
est nobis exire volentibus et cum texit id est cemento obduxit vilicus quia
ista Rome timentur quo vivendum etc quia Rome Eucalegon proprium
nomen pro appelativo posuit, et est urbana † po ... † poscit ad extingendum
ignem frivola supellectilia et dicuntur frivolum quasi fere valens obolum
iam tertia a tertia mansione. Rome enim erant domus bicamerate, trica-
merate nam si hoc probat respiciens ad naturam ignis, cuius est semper
in altum tendere tegula a tegendo lectus hic ostendit quod domus equaliter
conburentur sed non equaliter restituuntur ; quia si domus pauperis
ardet numquam reintegratur, si vero divitis in melius reparatur. Et
adducit Codrum in exemplo pauperis, Asturium in exemplo divitis, et hoc
est lectus etc Procula id est uxore urceoli vascula sunt ornamentum abaci
mense marmoree. Abacus est ut Cornutus refert, mensa geometricalis
in qua super glaucum pulverem, virge geometricales gladio depinguntur
cantharus vas vimineum Chiron proprium nomen servi vel Chiro id est
imago Chironis que erat ibi depicta marmore id est mensa marmorea opici
id est corrosovi < sic > . Ops, opis terra est que consumit omnia inde
opicus corrosivus hospitio thalamo tecto aliqua parva domo si magna ita
est de paupere sed si domus divitis combusta est in melius restituitur
et hoc est si magna etc mater id est Roma sit horrida id est ista vel mater
id est aliqua matrona, id est nigra veste vidue vadimonia casus marmora
statuas marmoreas vel columnas aliquid vasa nuda sunt scelatura candida
argentea, Euphranoris et Polycliti optimi auri fabri fuerunt hic alius orfeta
Fecassiani populi sunt culture deorum intenti, forulos id est cistas mediam
id est dimidium sapientie sue, id est librorum suorum, vel dimidiam ima-
ginem Minerve auree Persicus proprium nomen idem qui et arturus vel
Persicus id est dives nam Perse divissimus, unde Horatius : Persicos odi
puer appara< tus > 35. Iovi id est laudatissimi orborum id est carentium
heredum et merito suspectus cum de tot et tanta recipiat si potes nota
quod quidam tantum propter ludos Rome morabantur, et non alia causa
et ideo dicit si potes circensibus. Circenses vocat ludos quasi circum
enses, et ubi fiebant ludi ex altera parte < harenis > e ex altera enses, ut
utrobique periculum ignavie perimmerent Sore nomen loci adverbialiter
positum Fusci † ... † nomen loci Frusinone similiter et nota quia nomina
locorum prime vel secunde declinationis per ablatum quanti quanto precio
tenebras id est tenebrosam domum sed hic id est in predictis locis brevis
non multus profundus reste quia aquam manu poteris haurire plantas
holerum vel arborum facili sine labore bidens, bidens enim est instrumen-
tum rusticorum ferreum a duobus dentibus sic dictis bidens id est avis
bidens, enim quasi biens dicitur duarum annorum quia tunc erat avis apta
ad sacrificandum Pictagoreis id est discipulis Pitagore, nota quia sentencia
erat Pitagore quod anime transibant de uno corpore in aliud unde ab omni
carne et legumine abstinebat, et herbas comedebant epulum hoc epulum in

35. Horatius, Carmina 1. 38. 1 .

e. <harenis > , conieci pro aranis ; lectio incerta, P.
 IN SATIRAM 3.193-263 177

singulari dicitur in plurali hec epule est id est valet lacerte id est orti, nam
lacerte in ortis habundant vel lacerte id est servi et sit proprium nomen
vel lacerte id est tanto terre, quanto potuit lacerto mensurari plurimus
alia causa cur discedat quia Rome non licet pauperi dormire ; tum
< propter > < nuntios > < et > < quadrigis > f, tum propter aurigas
clamitantes vigilando id est propter nimias vigilias ipsum id est indigestus
quia dormiendo melius excoquit quam vigilando herens solutus, enim
adherere non possit namque et cetera meritoria dicuntur taberne, vel
quaelibet loca in quibus mercimonia conquirentur magnis id est haben-
tibus magnas opes Druso nomen est cuiusdam somnolenti vitulisque mari-
nis id est phoscis; sompnolenti sunt pisces qui ubi in tempestate exci-
tantur et, ut dicunt, mare eos eicit, et in litore a rusticis inveniuntur dor-
mientes Mandre proprium nomen post appelativum Mandra enim auriga
erat superbus, qui stans in curru magno clamore transeuntes pauperes
conviciari solebat, eo quod transire non posset si vocat adhuc est de verbis
Umbricii causas sue discessionis exponentis officium puplicum vehetur
nam in curru erit ; pauperes vero pedites incedent Libuna Liburni populi
sunt velocissimi, et hic pro vehiculo propter agilitatem obiter id est
interim et sunt due dictiones, id est ad tollendum itineris fastidium
dormiet bene dico dormiet namque pono ante licet scribat vel dormiat;
tamen ante unda multitudo populi prior id est precedens item aliud in
convers <o >, quia populus etc lignum id est ligneum baculum metretam
metreta posset dici quidlibet duas mensuras continens ; metre enim
mensura, inde metreta fere quod lagena magna id est contenta tunc enim
maior videtur clavus id est calcar ; nonne vides ? et respicit ad illud quod
dixerat. Si vocat officium puplum, et tangit eorum consuetudinem , quia
de lucro sportule in loco capacissimo grande vicium preparabant, et ibi
conveniebant fumo id est frequen<ta >tione vel fumo propter multitu-
dinem ferculorum culina id est aparatus culine Corbule proprium
n<omen> servi gravissima honera ferentis servulus per hoc reprehendit
avariciam Romanorum, qui uno servulo erant contenti sarte id est sarcite,
quod pauperum est sarcio enim sarcis sarcivi dicitur sarcitum tu<nica >
unde sarcicus ta tu coruscat coruscando et vibrando nutatur Sarraco
genus est vehiculi quo vehuntur honera gravissima nam si vere miratur
« nam si » etc Ligustica Ligures populi sunt apud quos columpne mar-
moree sunt inmanissime montem id est ponderis magnitudinem instar
montis quid superest post casum et ruinam illius ponderis, quasi diceret
<< nihil, ossa necdum membra » more anime quasi diceret quemadmodum
anima non videtur, ita nec pervolare << mos > corporis domus quasi
diceret ita pauper mole ponderis atritus moritur sed domus id est familia
secura sed non cavens a periculo sonat id est tumultuatur striglibus.
Sincopatem posuit pro strigilibus ; antiquitus habebant aureas vel argen-
teas strigiles quibus carnem prurientem scalpebant unctis iam scilicet
ungebant enim se in conviviis ut ad cibum recipiendum laxiores essent
componit preparat lintea manu tergia guto id est pixide pleno plena ibi

f. <propter > < nuntios > <et> < quadrigis > , protasse nuntibus quadrigis, P.
g. tergia, ut vid.
12
178 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

posita hec talia officia properantur confestinantia parantur inter pueros

id est ministros ripa Lethes vel Stigis novicius qui noviter venit
Phorthmea Caronem, qui Porhmeus dictus est per portum vel ad portum
veniens alnum naviculam cenosi ergo id est Stigis, quasi diceret non
sperat se transportari trientem tercia est pars assis antiquitus in ore
mortui ponebatur, triens, id est tercia pars assis, quam descendens ad
inferos dabat Caroni naulum, id est precium navis. Sed subita morte
preventus non habuit quem daret trientem respice hec pericula Rome sunt
de die et hec de nocte respice adtende noctis que de nocte fiunt alia a
periculis dici quod spatium id est quanta sublimitas rimosa fracta vel
fissa curta mutilata pondere gravitatem ictus notat silicem multo magis
ergo hominem possis ignavus igne animi vacuum testatus sine testamento
facto utpote fortassis in proximo moriturus tot fas id est tot mortes
vigiles id est patentes ergo optes et quia tot mortes tibi imminent per
fenestras ergo optes hoc ne quamvis miserabile ut sint etc id est ut
pedissequa potius prohiciat de pelvi urinam quam testam ebrius ac
petulans non solum propter supradictas causas fugiendum est sed etiam
propter hoc, quod si aliquis ebrius fuit non post dormiet donec aliquam
verberavit ut dat patitur noctem Pelide Achilles dolens de morte Patrocli
dormire non poterat ille scilicet ebrius cubat non aliter nisi aliquam
inveniat quibusdam non omnibus rixa contumelia si verberet et ab alio
verberetur sed quamvis pauperes quid verberant, sed divites non audent
atingere ? improbus annis id est iuvenis lena genus est vestis preciose,
et dicitur lena a leniendo coctina pro coctinea, id est tincta croco ; crocus
est genus coloris multum id est multitudo que eum precedit me quem
divites quid non audent tangere ?, sed me et ponit pro quolibet dispenso
id est dispono ne sit nimis gressum tempero enim digna audi ; ultimam
produxit propter sequentes consonantes premia finem quia omne premium
in fine est misere quia verberor et non verbero sed rixa correctio est stat
ebrius contra me necesse et sine voluntate tamen necessitate nam quid
bene < dixit > h necesse nam etc cuius aceto ita legatur « cuius » tu
existens concha vas vilis vini cuius aceto tumes id est « cuius accido vino
plenus es ? » bene dixit tumes quia huius modi vinum inflatum reddit, et
sunt due questiones in una implicite elixi cocti in aqua, lixos enim aqua
et inde lixiva aqua cocta vervecis arietis qui vervex dicitur ante me † i
quem habet in capite labra id est caput calcem ictum de talo asis moraris
proseucha domus est mendicorum a proseuco cas quod est mendicare,
dicitur etiam t ... † proseuca id est deprecatoria, inde proseuce depre-
catorie discere respondere tantundem est etc faciunt cogunt sibi fieri
vadimonia quasi de illatis viciis rogat veniam petit paucis cum
< preliis > ¹ iam fracti sunt nec tamen non solum verba timenda sunt sed
etiam spoliatio postquam omnis ubique tabule tabernarum olim catenis
iugabantur ideo dixit catenate vel catene obserate fixa clausa ; grassari

h. dixerit, P.
i. ante me, ink splotch ; lectio incerta.
k. ante proseuca, ink splotch.
1. Prelibus, P.
 IN SATIRAM 3.264-322 179

est aliqui crudeliter agere, sed in hoc loco pro homicida ponitur armato
quotiens in Pontina palude et in insula que Gallinaria dicitur, eo quod
mitat in Gallias ; latrones ibi inhabitabant et viatores dispoliabant. Ad
hec loca servanda missi sunt armati, et latrones nocte confluxerunt, et in
nocte spoliabant pauperes et interficiebant ad vivaria pisces subaudit qua
fornace vere multi sunt latrones Rome ; quia multe fiunt catene ad eos
ligandos modus quantitas timeas id est timere possis vomer marra sarcula
a sario saris quod est < agrestibus > † m extirpare felices continuo,
quandoquidem tot catene et tot carceres modo Rome fuerunt, que anti-
quitus non oportebat fieri ergo dicas felicia. uno carcere id est Tulliano
quam Tullius fecit vel uno quia pauci erant nocentes his alias quasi
diceret multas tibi ostendi causas quare discederem a Roma ; adhuc
plures possem adiungere sed unde etc ; inclinat pro inclinatur mulio
custos muli innuit signum facit Aquino nam Iuvenalis Aquinas erat
properantem volente refici id est recreari que evoca Elvinam Cererem
nomen dee pro nomine ville ubi colitur Eluinam ab eleno eleusis, sic dictus
propter fontana Dianam similiter nomen < dee > n pro nomine ville ni
pudet magis sapientem a minus sapiente adiuvari, caligatus caligis
indutus.

m. agrestibus : agregetibus ut vid.

n. deam , P.
 < GLOSAE IN JUVENALIS SATIRAM QUARTAM >

Ecce iterum In hac satira reprehendit Ro<manos > de pluribus viciis,

precipue autem Crispinum et Neronem et eos precipue de ingluvie et
luxuria, et in principio Crispinum de incestu tangit, dicens ecce iterum
Crispinus adest hec litera habitur in quibusdam libris iterum quia supe-
rius eum reprehenderat, adest in memoriam venit ; per suas turpitudines
in quibusdam libris habitur et est tunc sic legatur ecce iterum Crispinus
nam secundum Pris<cianum > adverbium demonstrandi sine verbo posset
esse 36 vocandus id est dignus ut vocetur quia monstruosus est ad partes
scilicet satiras libri componendas monstro vere vocandus est quia non est
viciosus sed ipsum vicium nulla virtus redemptum una virtus posset
hominem a viciis redimere sed Crispinus, cum omnibus viciis sit occu-
patus, nulla virtute ab eis redimitur egre scilicet a bono solam non excludit
avariciam, sed eius oppositum scilicet virtutem dilicias viduas omnia
quam crimina facit, hoc excepto quod cum viduis adulterari dedignantur
quasi in eis nimium sit peccatum delicias P viduas id est deliciosam viduam
et divitem quid refert quandoquidem adeo est viciosus ; < quid > ¶ ergo
prosunt ei divitie ? quantis porticibus nam a domo sua usque ad
capitolinum porticum extenderat iumenta equos nemorum viridia Riorum,
que magnitudine sua nemoribus comparantur Foro ubi carior est terra
nemo malus vere nihil prodest quia est infelix et vere est infelix quia
malus et omnis malus infelix quod habemus per hanc sibi equipolentem,
nemo malus felix ; ergo nec corruptor a toto, in partem. Corruptor habet
has semper adulter, fornicator, incestus. Et est proprie incestus qui cum
sanctimoniali vel cum sanguinea procreabit, et dicitur incestus a Cesto,
cingulo Veneris, quo in legitimis nuptiis accingitur, vitata redimita ; subi-
tura lex erat ut si aliqua sacrimonialis in incestu reprehensa esset, viva
terra infoderetur, neque enim fas erat sacerdos post ferro vel igne
< immolari > r sed nec quasi diceret huius modi eum reprehendi , sed

36. Priscianus, Institutiones 15. 1.

o. deliciae, Juv.
p. Ibid.
q. qui, P.
r. inolari, P.
s. de (ante huius), omissi.
 IN SATIRAM 4.1-38 181

hec sunt leviora fecisset idem sub iudice id est da<m >naretur , ille enim
sub iudice cadit quem iudicium deprehendit namquod quasi diceret « est-
ne ita viciosus » , est utique nam quod, Titio Seiioque istis honestis quid
agas id est quid dicas, scilicet de sequentibus, quia superfluus et gulosus
dira ingluvie da<m >nata V▾ crimine id est criminosa mu < l > lum w hic eum
de superfluitate reprehendit mullum nomen piscis Crispinum prudentiam
artificis Crispini qui piscem emit, ut tali munere divitis orbi hereditatem
mereretur, deest si abstulit admite ; ad se tulit ceram testamentum quia,
ante inventus esset usus parcamini in cera scribebatur precipuam id est
capacem est ratio quasi diceret ratio captande hereditatis laudabilis est,
sed hec est ulterior id est deterior si pro quia magne diviti antro † ... †
specularibus fenestris nihil tale quasi diceret nihil non expectes, ut
aliquid tale de alio audias. Multa preter piscem, Apicius Apicius quidam
fuit qui vivendo luxuriose totum patrimonium † d<ila >pidavit † deinde
transtulit se culine et ibi quedam de condituris scripsit miser quia sua
consumpsit frugi ad frugem et ad utilitatem natus, respectu Crispini hoc
tu graviter invehitur auctor, in eum dicens hoc tu faciebas, subaudit
furtim quod est piscator papyro vinco patria Egiptia, quasi diceret cum tu
esses piscator, solebas tanti vendere pisces sed squame id est piscis
potuit fortasse vere non vendebas pisces tanti quia tu ipse non eras tanti,
vel aliter dementia est quod tanti piscem emeris quia piscatorem minoris
habere poteris provincia regio est sed maiores sed agros vendit minoris
precii qualis tunc quandoquidem Crispinus piscem tanti emit, quid igitur
de imperatore sperandum est ? induperatorem pro imperatorem et est
epenthe, contraria sincope cum scurra Crispinus purpura indutus
magni Palati ructaret post saturitatem tot sex id est piscem emptum tot
sexterciis scilicet partem non magnam sed exiguam et sumptam de
margine id est fine quando minora fercula apponuntur cene ubi minus ▾
comeditur non prandium et etiam modice iam princeps de piscatore, Nero
enim constituit eum principem Arabie siluros pisci olim viles sunt muni-
cipes unde capiebant munera fracta de merce non enim tantum dabatur
quantum poscebat incipe Clio volens auctor vicia Neronis reprehendere,
que magna et incredebilia erant. Cum difficile sit illa referre, invocat
musam suam iuxta illud Horacii, nec deus intersit etc dicens hic licet
considere id est circa propositum vicium aliquantulum immorari non est
cantandum quasi res ficta sit cum semianimum modo incipit semianium
debilitatum Neronis tirannide laceraret bene dixit qui regere debebat,
potius lacerabat Flavius id est non calvus ultimus quia ut Suetonius dicit,
progenies Cesarum in Nerone defecit 37, quia tante fuit nequitie quod
nemo sui generis post ipsum ad imperium delatus est decidit id est in
rete cecidit spatium magnitudo rumbi piscis Adriani non quia captus esset

37. Suetonius, Vita Galbae 1.

t. daguaretur, P.
v. dagnata, P.
w. mulum, P.
x. Ibid.
y. menus, P.
182 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

in Adriano mari, sed quia magnitudine comparabilis erat piscibus in

Adriano mari captis Ancon locum describit ubi captus fuit ante domum
Dorica Dorica est civitas in Italia quam Dores edificaverunt implevitque
magnitudine sua sinus retis nec enim bene dixit, implevit nec enim etc
heserat reti illis piscibus Mareotica Mareotis palus est in Sithia, ubi maximi
pisces sub glacie nutriuntur serviret que ut Domini servire deberet tor-
rentis Ponti frigore pingues ut dicunt physici : frigus pisces impinguat,
calor autem attenuat destinat hoc monstrum id est rumbum linique id est
retis pontifici Neroni ; imperatores dicebantur pontifices quis enim nimi-
rum si Neroni destinavit, quia vendere non auderet proponere venalem
dare delatore acusatore protinus scilicet rumbum proponeret alge purga-
mentum maris et ponitur pro ipso mari alge causam remige gubernatore
nudo a iunceis vel succincto, vel falsum esset vivaria Caesaris hec erant
iuxta mare, ut cum mare redundaret facile pisces illuc confluerent si
quid Palfarius et Armillatus adulatores erant, quasi diceret : non solum
hunc piscem dicunt esse Neronis, sed etiam si suis credimus famulis
omnia bona terre et pelagi Neronis sunt, et hoc est si quid. fisci fiscus
est proprie bursa regia ; ponitur tamen aliquando < usurpatione > z pro
quolibet sacco ergo quia est accusandus si proponat donabitur piscis
imperatori ne pereat piscator iam letifero cedente determinat tempus quo
captus est piscis ille, videlicet in fine Autumpni < introitu > a Hieme,
quando posset reservari letifero mortifero sperantibus timentibus ; et
abutitur vocabulo, nam spes de bono, sperantibus diuturnitatem timentibus
stridebat flabris ventorum deformis ab effectu predam piscem recentem
incorruptam tamen quamvis posset servari incorrupta tamen hic piscator ;
Aubster ventus est adeo calidus, quod etiam pisces in mari corrumpere
dicitur. Unde hortatur nos auster : << coquite < horum >bobsonia >>
urgueat cogat deferre ne putrescat et ut id est velud lacus suberant hic
est subessent, quasi diceret ita festinat nitendo, contra in aquam velud
aque obsequio deferretur, vel aliter piscator properat ut id est quamvis
lacus suberant id est sub glacie erant, utpote congelati ; quasi diceret
quamvis tempus aptum esset ad piscem incorruptum servandum, tamen
properat. Vel aliter properabat in aquam quamvis aque obsequio defer-
retur ; et hoc est ut in quamvis ubi quamquam ostendit quo loco piscis
oblatus sit Neroni diruta tangit historiam . Cum Alba sub Tullio Hostilio
a Romanis fuisset eversa, et reliquias veste, scilicet ignem perpetuum,
quem Eneas abstulerat, acceptare vellent, tanta vis grandinis subito ceci-
dit, ut vix eam sustinerent ; quare reliquias illas intactas dimiserunt ?
minorem quia maius templum erat ei Rome turba miratrix obstitit potius
ex admiratione quam ex repulsione cessit id est locum postea dedit
+ expectant > † ut recipiantur et videant, vel spectant admirantur obsonia
vocat piscem ; obsonium vocatur modicus cibus inter modicos modice
sumptus, et dicitur obsonium quasi contra somnium. Et reprehendit

z. ursupatem, P.
a. intrente, P. pro introitu.
b. hororum, P.
 IN SATIRAM 4.40-98 183

ingluviem Neronis, ubi tantum piscem vocat obsonium Atridem Neronem,

vel quia ex parte matris duxit originem agre <s >tis , vel quia similis fuit
et incredelitate piscens piscator et est nomen, vel piscens a piscens
oppido maiora privatis cum enim privatim vivimus modice vivimus genialis
genium colit ille qui se bene procurat ; nota quod antiquitus diem nati-
vitatis celerebrimed habebant laxare sagina ad recipiendum piscem sagi-
natum vel laxare implere ipse capi voluit adulatur, ei quasi diceret ulter
ad rete venit quid apertius verba sunt poete hac adulatione nihil est
apertius surgebant quasi diceret erigebantur utpote qui de adulatione
gloriabatur nec iterum quia nihil etc potestas imperatoria sed deest quasi
diceret piscis oblatus est sed mensura patine id est vasis in quo integer
coqueretur, et dicitur patina a patendo pallor timor ex amicitia Neronis
proveniens. Consequens pro antecedenti misere quantum ad proceres qui
interficiebantur magne quia se fingebat amicum ut licentius interficeret
Liburno id est precone, Liburni enim populi sunt agiles abolla vestis
philosophica rapta cum festinantia sumpta villicus prefectus attonite
Neroniana crudelitate anne aliud ? erat, subaudit ad quod vocarentur ;
verba sunt Pegasi tum consequentum, veniunt prefecti proceres interpres
expositor inermi nota quod iusticia semper est armata, inermis autem
iusticia non est iusticia, et est oppositio in adiecto < Crispi > e Neronis
cuius erant mores qualis quia quod predicabat ore complebat opere, et
quia talis erat ergo quis comes esset ; subaudit regenti maria imperatori
ferre pro afferre sif clade neroniana et peste inculcatio est verborum in
quo id est cum Nerone fatum pendebat id est mors imminebat locuturi
de pluviis Nota quod si aliquis familiaris Neroni prediceret aliquid futu-
rum, ut pluvias et talia, et ita non contingeret, statim interficebatur igitur
ille nam non audebat voluntati eius obviare torrentem metaphora est
tracta a navigante, qui, si contra inpetum aque tendat, frustra laborat. Hic
ergo brachia contra torrentem non direxit, quia in nullo voluntati Neronis
obviavit nec mirum quia non erat civis aliquis libera libera profert verba,
qui quod in corde habet dicere, non formidat vero id est veritati sic quia
tacuit octogensima solstitia nota quod sol<s >titium & bis est in anno, sed
premissum et multas hiemas, ideo a generali descendit ad specialem
significationem scilicet ad significandum Estivale sol<s >titum h his armis
id est cum taciturnitate non ideo cum iuvene id est cum filio suo Dormitio
maneret quia vero id ; quod tam probus erat, fecit eum interficere sed olim
isti senes et nobiles venerunt, sed mirum est quod ad senectutem perve-
nerunt quia olim id est dudum senectus in nobilitate id est senex nobilis
est par prodigio quia Nero adeo nobiles oderat ut si quis nobilis diu viveret
pro prodigio < haberetur > i unde sit quandoquidem nobiles ita pereunt,
ergo malo ignobilis esse et diu vivere quam nobilis et cito perire, et hoc

c. agretis, P.
d. celerebrime, ut vid., P.
e. ce, P pro Crispi.
f. ci, P, pro si.
g. solititium, P.
h. Ibid.
i. haberentur, P.
184 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

est unde fit recurrendum est ad fabulam : post gigantes interfectos a

diis Terra peperit Antheum, ad quem interficiendum miserunt dii Hercu-
lem ; periit Antheus. Dolens ergo terra quod propter virtutem ita perisset,
< peperit > et furvam < sic > in contemptum deorum, que sororcula
gigantum dicta est. Priscianus tamen legit fraterculus id est magnus
frater de Antheo, et est urbana diminutio ursos figebat Numidas Rome
adducebantur ursi ut ibi iuvenes vires suas experirentur quis enim
continuo. Probus erat sed nihil profuit, quia probitas adeo viluit, quod
omnes putant se esse probos ; et hoc sub interrogatione ponit patricias
artes id est artes nobilium Brute tangit historiam. Tarquinius Superbus
civis Ro<me>, quos sapientes noverat, ne sue tiranidi contrairent, ab urbe
expulit. Brutum autem quia se stultum simulabat, dimisit qui postea
ipsum ab urbe eiecit, et cives Ro<me > revocavit. Id vero nemo modo
miratur, quia unicuique est facile id est videtur facile inponere barbato
regi id est decipere barbatum regem. Impono nis ut dicit Beatus Iero-
nimus ; datum adiunctum est decipere cuius supina sunt, impostum,
inposta et participium impostus ; tum nec melior id est pallidus
quamvis ignobilis id est quamvis ei non erat timendum quia ignobilis erat
veteris offense quia concubuerat cum Messalina uxore Neronis et tamen
improbior id est improbus factus cinedo scribente saturam id est quamvis
comedus quidam inde scriberet satiram vel quia comedus quidam de eo
scripxerat satiram , et iam improbior fuerat, vel improbior quolibet
comedo montani venter ventruosus montanus abdomine id est pingue-
dine tardus vel matutino vel quia in mane se perungebat, vel quia ab
oriente ablatum erat duo funera antiquitus amomo ungebant corpora
sevior causa efficatior aperire ad aperiendum tenui susurro id est tacita
adulatione, Fuscus meditatus prelia Dacis qui ibi interfectus est et ideo
dicit qui servabat viscera yronice mortifero delatione numquam vise quia
cecus erat. ipse dico grande monstrum id est grandis et monstruosus
nostro in quo sunt plura monstra a ponte satelles notum est quia in pon-
tibus solebat mendicare. Inde Nero transtulerat eum ad Aulam, et ibi
satelicium adulationis implevit. Aricinos apud Aricium opidum tendentes
iactaret daret. devexe ipse enim devexit nemo quasi diceret quamvis
cecus esset nemo etc de laude piscis in levom in sinistra parte Cilicis
cilices dicuntur pirate a Cilicia regione expediti, nunc autem ponit cilicis
pro gladiatoris pegma genus ludi nobis ignoti pueros raptos in theatris
erant quedam cortine inter quas pueri post peractos ludos recipiebantur
ad turpes usus cedit et in adulando fanaticus fanatici dicuntur sacerdotes
Fauni qui demonico spiritu agitati divinabant oestro spiritu ; oestrum
genus est musce qua agitantur boves Arviragus nomen regis Britanie
temone agmine sudes spinas hoc defuit quasi diceret contra omnia eadem
que dixit Vegento, dixit et Fabricius sed hoc unum defuit quod patriam
et etatem reticuit, vel Fabricius et Vegento nomina sunt eiusdem quid nam
igitur verba sunt Neronis quasi diceret « quia tam bene dixisti de pisce,
quid ergo censes decoquendo ? » coneti pro concidetur absit verba sunt

k. pereperit, P.
 IN SATIRAM 4.98-154 185

Montani dedecus ut considatur testa vas fictile colligat comprehendat

spatiosum piscis tenui muro reprehendit ingluviem Neronis, nam si spissus
esset murus, dificilius coquereretur Prometheus nomen proprium figuli
pro quolibet figulo magnus sagax subitus velox et expeditus properate
argillam et rotam instrumenti genus cum quo fit. Sed hoc Quasi diceret
hactenus figulos cum habuisti nunc autem ut te sequantur iubet vicit ita
placuit Neroni, et bene locutus est ad libitum Neronis quia ipse noverat
luxuriam id est voracitatem imperii imperatoris veterem consuetam medias
ipse enim de media nocte comedebat aliam aserentiam < sic > nulli pos-
set dici << fuit ne adeo gulosus ? » Respondetur nulli etc ; tempestates
Tempore et Ve<gento > fuit gulosus nam callebat id est callide sciebat an
ostrea genus est piscis Circeis locus est in mari a Circe ita dictus Lucrinum
ad saxum id est Lucrinum lacum Rutupino Rutupi civitas est ubi ostrea
nascuntur litus patriam echini nomen piscis surgitur postquam dictum
est quid sit faciendum de pisce misso id est dimisso magnus ironice si
cattis populi sunt Mauritanie penna id est veloci nuntio, atque propter
rem futilem istos convocavit atque etc claras famosas illustres nobiles
impune sine vindicta sed periit tempore Neronis exercitus Ro< me >
in Hispaniam missus est ubi in odium Neronis po <stquam > Ro<me >
Galbam imperatorem sibi prefecit. Quo audito, Nero doluit misitque
nuntios qui adventum predicerent, et accepit duos acutissimos pugiones
quos lateri suo, tamquam se percussurus, aponebat. Deinde audito quod
Galba non prope adesset, manum retrahebat ad ultimum, audiens quod
iam civitatem intraret, se interfecit Cerdonibus sutoribus Lamiarum nobilis
Lamiarum ; fuit Rome nobilissima familia, a Lamio sic dicta.
 < GLOSAE IN IUVENALIS SATIRAM QUINTAM >

Si te eadem In hac satira reprehendit quoddam vilissimum genus homi-

num, scuras scilicet, qui Romanis divitibus fingebant, ut raram et luxu-
riosam cenam perciperent. De qualibus erat Trebius quem cum multociens
Iuvenalis de scurrilitate accusaset, ipse hanc accusationem pretendebat :
ventre nichil novi frugalius. Nunc autem cum minime eum videret
desistere, dicit se non amplius huic excusationi credere, sic dicens O
Trebius etc, propositi quia proposuisti vivere ex alieno mens voluntas
illa convicia Sarmentus et Galba Samentus et Galba tempore Neronis
vilissimi scurre fuerunt iniquas propter convicia sibi illata metuam
recusabo quod enim metuimus, recusamus ventre verba sunt Trebii se
excusantis hoc tamen quasi diceret quamvis dicas te nihil parere ventri,
tamen melius esset te mendicare quam ita vivere, et hoc est puta id est
pone aluo et tamen inani id est pauca esce recipienti vel inani in
s<o >ciabili¹ secundum me crepido altitudo, quia in crepidinibus montium
mendicabant vacat ad mendicandum pons ubi intra mendicabant tegetis
tugurii inuria cene id est iniuriosa cena tam ieiuna tanto tempore expectata
illic in domo temere vel genus pati sordes farris canini talem panem
qualis dat m canibus primo fige loco quasi diceret primus hoc deponere
quod nullum pre unum de servicio accipis nisi cibum et hoc est primum
iussus ad nos mercedem cibum neglectum ubi inveteratus es, cibus est
fructus remuneratio magne yronice et cetera rex id est dicens inputat
improperat rarum de t ... tibi ergo quandoquidem cibus est fructus
amicitie et tamen rarus ergo si libuit etc ecce fructus per duos ecce raritas
adhibere advocare te neglectum oblitis, et non causa tui sed honoris sui,
et hoc est ne culcita nota quod in domibus suis habebant triclinia, id est
tres ordines lectorum : clinon curvum, inde triclinium, quia curvi et
iacentes comedebant. In primo lecto dicens cum maribus familie sue ;
discumbebat in secundo domina cum pedissecis suis ; in tercio hospites
et hoc est tertia culcita et hec est summa et cetera et vere quia quid et
cetera habet ergo more satirici transfert se de prima ad terciam; rum-
<pere> vigilare dimittere more festinantium sollicitus sollicitatus
salutatrix salutantium peregerit complevit orbem circuitum dubiis in mane

1. saciabili, P.
m. datur, P.
 IN SATIRAM 5.1-59 187

neque enim tunc ex toto aparent illo tempore id est de media nocte
sarraca plaustra frigida propter noctem frigidam vel quia sunt in septen-
trione Boote stella est vicina plaustro pigri quia non vadet ad occasum
circumagunt id est vertunt se qualis cena quasi diceret quamvis est rara
cena illa, tamen est vilis vinum subaudit, aponitur tibi vinum te subaudit
Coribanta insanum. Coribantes enim populi sunt qui inebriati ad iurgia
surgunt, et dicuntur coribantes quasi coroboantes proludunt id est prolu-
dium fit per iurgia sed mox id est demum tu saucius ab aliis torques
contra alios et ab aliis vulneraris et hoc est deterges vulnera sanguine
infecta Saguntina id est mo <s > n Saguntinorum ; populi sunt qui ad prelia
surgunt in conviviis lagona vase vinario ipse quasi diceret tibi datur vile
vinum, at ipse bibit optimum et hoc est diffusum id est vindemiatum ;
<< capillato»» et sit proprium nomen consulis vel capillato id est eo tempore
quo Nero est capillatus, quod postea factus est calvus bellis socialibus id
est civilibus cardiaco morbido : cardian Grece ; cor Lat <inum >, inde
cardia, cordis pulsus, et cardiacus qui hoc patitur cras bibet tangit eos de
diversitate poculorum Albanis ubi crescunt bona vina Setinis nomen loci
patriam id est locum titulum nomen senectus senectus ; solebant anti-
quitus notare et locum et tempus in doliis fuligine nigredine teste amfore
Trasea et Helvidius optimi potatores fuerunt Brutorum Brutus et Cassius
Iulium Cesarem interfecerant, quam diem aniversarium honorifice Romani
celebrant Brutorum plurale posuit pro singulari Cassi syncope est ipse
dicens capaces magnas crustas gemmas, nam crusta ; † te ... † gemmarum
est crustum ti<bi > panis Eliadum Eliades sorores Pherontis fuerunt que
secundum quosdam in alnos mutate fuerunt ; secundum quosdam in popu-
los berullo lapides preciosos inequales propter celaturas fialas vasa
argentea accutos ne aliqui surripiat vel datur verba sunt ministri datur
vel cipho vel mihi qui te observ<at > ° quia preclara illi laudatur iaspis
in poculo ut multi faciunt, subaudit a digitis ab anulo tale quales id est
Eneas, quem preposuit Dido Iarbe zelotipo zelotipus dum ille quidem
alterius forme habet suspicionem vel decus ; forma habitur suspicio tu
Beneventani quasi diceret huius modi pocula habebit , dicens siccabis tu
id est hauries calicem id est cifum sutoris si vatimii P Beneventani cum
loco nasorum id est angulorum poscentem sulpura id est poscentem reli-
gari vitro id est quemadmodum ruptum vitrum religari expetit fumo
su<l >furis si stomachus ostenderat diversitatem vini in poculis ; ecce
diversitatem aque Geticis niger cursor in terram cursu ossea dura Mauri
† ... † a Latine via est ubi mortui sepeliebantur clivose monticulose flos Asie
quasi diceret ita turpis ministrabit tibi sed ante ipsum stabit ; subaudit
flos Asie etc paratus emptus Tulli et Anci reges Romani fuerunt et ne
quid plus dicerem ?; turpius est maiore quam fuerunt omnia frivola id
est omnis supelex frivola, fere obolum volentia, respectu tanti precii
getulum nigrum Ganymedum p<roprium > n<omen > pro Appollo posuit

n. mox, P.
o. observa, P.
p. vatimii, sic cod.
q. post Mauri illegibile.
188 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

nescit dedignatur miscere bene dixit misceri nam antiquitus miscebant

gelida calidis unde calix sed forma non solum modo propter precium est
superus, sed propter formam et etatem supercilio superbia, nam in super-
cilio superbia denotatur ; veteri tibi scilicet nec mirum quia maxima etc.
propria est a toto ecce sic <ut > de diversitate poculorum et ministrorum
egit, ita de diversitate panis agit, dicens ecce etc vix frangibilem muscida
muscus ci lanugo panis dicitur muscus ci herba que super discum lapidii
farrine panis solide dure genuinum dentem maxillarem agitent commo-
veant pre duricia<m > tener tibi talis panis aponitur ac domino servatur
dextram etc siligo siliginis flos est farine, non ut quidam dicunt species
annone que dicitur segalum cohibere ne manum extendes ad panem
capiendum artopte cohibere id est nivei panis ; arthos enim panis
< d > opos s labor, sive intentum, inde arthodopus panis cum labore factus.
Licit dixeram « memento cohibere dexteram » tamen finge et cetera impro-
bulum aliquantulum improbulum in rapiendo superest sussistit ponere
deponere, dicens O audax impudens convivia es dignus, subaudit impleri
satiari canistris id est pan<ibus > ; in canistro reponitur panis consuetis
cotidianis novisse colorem nam divitum est panis aponiti notare colorem
scillaret verba sunt Trebii, quasi diceret « hec convicia mihi inserentur in
remuneratione servicii » , et hoc sub interrogatione ponit scillaret adversum
arduum Esquilias via est Rome ubi sepeliuntur mortui gelidas propter
noctem Iuppiter aer vernus nam illud tempus pluviosum est penula
Cappa quasi pene nulla aspice diversitatem ostendit in piscibus distinguat
impleat squilla genus est pisc <is > t septa condita asperagis in piscibus
vel boletis despiciat deorsum aspiciat utpote a magna scutella dependens
venit affertur sublata deportata sed tibi gammarus piscis mali saporis et
mortifer constrictus ne dissolvatur ut-pote ... tv dimidio Albigine ovi
scilicet feralis etc et non in vase sed in patella ipse iterum diversitatem
ostendit in oleo Venafrano id est optimo oleo. Venafranum opidum est
ubi habundat optimum oleum pallidus non coctus illud iam id est oleum
Lantenue alveolis ventribus canna navis Micipsarum illorum populorum
quibus prefuit Micipsa, qui fuit rex Numidie, cuius populi aliquando a
populo Romano devicti, huius modi oleum solvebant ; scribit subvexit
deportavit Boccare Boccar illi regioni prefuit, qui cum Rome esset obses,
volens lavari huius modi oleo se perungebat atris nocivis erit domini
aponetur domino Corsica insula est Tauro a Tauro-minio oppido quando
nec mirum si de longiori quo afferatur quando id est quia nostrum mare
Tirrenum peractum expiscatum defecit pisci gula gulosi macello locus ubi
venduntur carnes, et pisces quam pani pro piscatore retibus piscatione
proxima loca maris scilicet provincia regio instruit focum ministrant
dapes illinc a regione illa Lenas proprium nomen captator heredipeta
Aurelia vendat populis precii Murena lampreda nam dum posset opponi ;
in illo mari est Scilla et Caribdis, ergo non audent naves ingredi. Sic

r. descum, ut vid.
s. copos, P.
t. pisa, P.
v. post utpote illegibile.
 IN SATIRAM 5.60-132 189

falsum est quod dicit. Respondetur immo verum est quia dum Auster
cessat posset ingredi. Continuo, bene dixit de Siculo gurgite nam dum etc
continet afflatu Vos mulus domino fertur seduos etc congnata si brevis in
longitudine, Tiburi cum ciburi inventus ; glacie et maculis glacie alibus
maculis una incola torrente inundantem subit, enim gloacas † scrip ... †
subteraneum meatum Subure vicus est Rome ipsi ponit se Iuvenalis in
numero huius modi scurrarum, dicens ita nos tractat dicens ille et ego
velim etc loqui subaudit ipsi Virroni facilem placidam nemo quasi eo
invento dicit o Virro nemo petit a te mihi talia que etc modicis a Seneca,
magister fuit Neronis, bonus dapsilis namque bene dico, largiri solebant
namque quam modo habebatur antiquitus titulis nobilibus et fascibus
dignitatibus civiliter id est more civis modico sumpto face pro fac esto
anadiplosis est quando versus incipit ab eadem silliba qua terminatur
precedens dives tibi id est multa inpendens pauper amicis id est saltem
parum impendens ut multi faciunt, subaudit anseris diversitatem notat
in altilibus altilis id est domestica avis, et dicuntur altilia quasi altalia
quia manu aluntur par magnitudine flavi Meleagri Meleagrum optimus
fuit venator, frater Tidei, qui aprum in Caledoniam missum a Diana inter-
fecit roden peribuntur w, condientur ita dico si ver tunc erit nam in vere
nascuntur, et precipue quando tonat et hoc est tonitrua maiores propter
apposita tubera optata vere et optata nam Alidius gulosus ille inquit Lida
terra est ubi habundant frument<a> X habe tibi id est reserva et disiunge
et ab aratro dum tantum modo mittas tubera structorem quasi diceret
huius modi igdignationes patris et ut omnimodam indignationem habeas
spectes id est spectare potens structorem cocqum saltantem gesticulantem
chironomonta cum manus moventem ; Chiros enim manus, nomos movens,
inde chironomon manus movens volanti propter nimiam agilitatem dictata
imperata magistri domini vel dictamina magistri id est principalis , cocqui
nec minimo bene dici dictata quia refert id est distat quo gestu quo modo
duceris posset ille dicere << inde fortassis aliqui surripit ? ; » ad hoc
respondetur si temptaveris hiscere id est os aperire ; volens aliquis dicere
duceris extra has planta id est per plantam Cacus Cacus iste vaccas
Herculis furatus est, quem devictum Hercules per pedem ab antro,
retraxit, tria nomina id est tres litteras in nomine, scilicet ut dicaris fur ;
vel id est ut dicaris fur, homicida, adulter vel si temptaveris loqui tam-
quam nobilis ; loqui tamquam nobiles sint, quorum est in conviviis loqui
quando alia indignatio propinat id est poculum porrigit aut quando sumit
quod qui numquam quis vestrum alia tanta indignatio temerarius pre
sumptuosum perditus a sensu regi domino plurima vere non dicet quia
plurima et cetera lana id est cappa et dicitur lana a leniendo pertusa
pertusata quadringenta ecce in tanta vilitate haberis quia pauperes, si vero
dives fueris in maximo honoris eris, et hoc est si quis deus cuius est dare
divicias aut par diis id est aliquis potens donaret quadringenta nota quod
quadringenta sine adiungto positum ; nomen est ponderis nobis ignoti,
cum adiuncto nomen numeri ; ille dico melior fatis id est faciens te

w. per abuntur, ut vid ; - roden, deest Iuv.

x. frumentum, P.
190 GLOSAE IN IUVENALEM

meliorem quam fata esse in quem tu modo existens homuncio quantus ex

nihilo id est ex eo qui quasi nihil eras ; quasi diceret magnus da Trebio
et vere magnus quia diceret ministranti da Trebio etc ad Trebium ante
Trebium frater nomen est balandientis ilibus ubi caro est tenerrima
O nummi verba sunt auctoris quasi dicit totum honorem tibi impendo,
sed non † gra ... tui † sed non morum et hoc est O nummi prestat exhibet
dominus quamvis dicam te esse magnum amicum domini, tamen maior
potens fieri si herede carebis, et hoc est dominus et rex id est imperans
ipsi domino parvolus Eneas id est filius parvulus et est tractum ab illo
Virgiliano ubi Dido de fuga Enee conquerens, sic dicit si quis mihi etc
dulcior affabilior quod dixerat ; probat per generale proverbium iucundum
etc sed tua quasi diceret ad hoc ut fis carus domino habere oportet ste-
rilem uxorem sed tamen potes habere filios ex concubina et hoc est sed
licet non enim natos ex ancilla faciebant heredes Nuces proprium nomen
pro apelativo ipse Virro simel tecum loquaci loquax omnibus pueris toraca
id est vestem rogatum a pueris parasitus loquor vilibus e <c >ce² ostendit
diversitatem in boletis ancipites mortifero boletus domino et tamen non
quislibet sed talis qualis edit pro edebat olandit Agripina uxor Claudii
Neronis marito suo boletum aposuit veniferum, unde ille factus insanus
interiit illa iubebit ieerum < sic > diversitatem ostendit in pomis pascaris
solo quia non gustabis vel solo quia etsi non gustares tamen solo < ab > a
ore posses refici Phecum Feuces populi sunt quorum rex fuit Alchinous
cultor ortorum diligentissimus, qui habebat viridaria optima ubi poma
perpetuo vernabant unde ait perpetuus autumnus quasi ibi poma semper
erant suprepta furto allata ; Afris sororibus In Affrica fuerunt septem
sorores Athlantis que habebant viridarium in quo erant poma aurea tu
scabie huius modi poma domino aponentur tu aut frueris scabie mali id
est scabiosa mala in aggere in via nam in medio vie antiquitus lapides
augerebant, ut hinc atque inde flu <x >erint b aque tegitur armigerum
designat metuens flagelli timens verberari hirsuta capella id est ab mento
facto de corio hirsute capelle forsitan ita male te tractat dicens in convivio
<< et forsitan tu putas hec fieri causa amicitie, sed non fit immo ut deleas »
namque que comoedia id est quis comedus et quis melior id est ioculator
est melior, id est efficatior ad movendum risum gula id est gulosa vere
quandoquidem nihil est melius ad movendum risum guloso plorante ergo
omnia fiunt ideo ut per bilem id est ira ; bilis est amaritudo que de felle
commoto procedit stridere infrendere molari id est dente maxillari tu tibi
hanc indignationem tibi confert tu tibi videris etc ; regis id est divitis
convivia amicus sed ille etc ; nidore nidor proprie est < odor > cassatorum
coniectat estimat quis enim hic multum deest ad suplementum ; redit
enim ad illud quod dixerat de puero ministrante « sed forma sed etas etc »,
quasi diceret propter formam et etatem est superbus sed non ideo est

y. balandientis, ut vid.
z. exce, P.
a. ad, P.
b. fluerint, P.
c. ardor corr. ad odor, P.
 IN SATIRAM 5.133-173 191

tolerandus et vere quis enim id est miser et pauper bis potuit enim illum
ferre semel quia incognitum Etruscum aurum in Etruria apendebant collo
nobilium puerorum auream et argenteam bullam, vel cuiuslibet metalli, et
hoc est Etruscum vel nodus corrigie signum id est insigne de paupere de
paupere corrigie spes ita nos tractat « sed scio quare sustineatis quia spes
etc quia hoc putatis dicentes » ecce dabit nobis semesum dimidium de
clunibus de posterioribus minor altilis id est Galbina minor ansere vel
minor minoratus inde et propterea tacetis parati intacto pane quia putatis
post paratum panem carnem vobis dari intacto dum carnem expectatis
et stricto ne quis surripiat vobis ille sapit in hoc stultus es quia sic putas
sed ille sapit id est sapiens est qui utitur id est tractat omnia ferre videns
Iuvenalis qui non posset eum a proposito retrahere, concedit ex indigna-
tione dicens quia non ius desistere, et potes tot et tanta sustinere ergo
debes etc et adhuc peiora patieris et hoc est prebebis epulis id est colafi-
zandum rasus id est collo raso ; tu dico dignus his epulis et cetera.
 < GLOSAE IN IUVENALIS SATIRAM SEXTAM >

Credo Hic incipit secundus liber in quo nullam facit distinctionem quippe
cum hanc continuam materiam reprehendit, itaque plurima vicia mulierum.
Et hoc facit ex persona cuiusdam amici sui Postumi Ursidii Lentuli, qui,
cum chatamitus esset, volebat uxorem ducere et quod peius erat
cast <us > d. Cum tunc tempore scilicet nulla casta posset inveniri nam
tantum in tempore Saturni pudicicia regnabat, et ab hoc puncto incipit,
dicens credo etc rege regnante visa diu id est : diu est quod non fuit visa
vel diu visa sub Saturno cum frigida tempus determinat quo regnavit
pudicicia frigida naturaliter communi umbra id est communi habitatione
ignem culinam larem thalamum montana habitans in montibus thorus
proprie dicitur lectus de herbis tortis factus silvestrem utpote factum de
frondibus culmo stamine vicinarum domesticarum Cinthia proprium
nomen cuiusdam matrone adultere vel Cynthia Diana que la<t > mium e
Endimianem amavit nec tibi uxorem Catuli designat cui amasius suus
passerem domesticum dedit † < ut > , † f quo extincto adeo flevit ut ceca
fieret ; vel passerem vocat amicum propter nimiam frequentiam cohitus ;
bene dixi non similis sed ferens id est talis que ferret potanda surgenda
infantibus etc magnis horridior incultior ructante glandem unde tunc
vivebant quippe non est mirum si tantum tunc regnavit pudicicia quippe
id est quia etc orbe novo noviter condito rupto robore fabulam tangit,
primo tempore homines domibus carentes nocte adveniente in truncis
arborum latitabant, unde in mane exeuntes dicebantur nasci de robore
compositique luto respicit ad fabulam ; Prometheus fecit < quasdam > 8
imagines de luto nullo dixi pudicitiam regnasse sub Saturno et forsitis ¹ et
sub love fuerunt multa vestigia nondum Grecis adtende quod per illud
iuramus quod carius habemus, Greci autem causa adulationis iurabant
per capita dominorum suorum, et hoc est nondum timeret non pro
pecunia sed pro caulibus ac pomis et aperto id est tamen omnis homo
viveret aperto id est incustidito i pallatim dixi quod sub Iove fuerunt

d. castam, P.
e. lamium, P.
f. ut illegibile in P.
g. quedam, P.
h. forfitis, ut vid.
i. incustitudo, conieci.
 IN SATIRAM 6.1-47 193

aliqua vestigia, sed deinde consequentum astrea id est iusticia, filia Astre
gigantis que quia favet diis in gigantomachia, inter astra est locata hac
comite id est pudicitia sorores nam iste due virtutes invicem sunt con-
cordes antiquum quia in tempore Iovis cepit mechia ergo † g ... anti † est
lectum. lectus est proprie coniugatorum cubile concubinarum fulcri id est
lecti a fulciendo sacri coniugalis genium genius dicitur a < gignendo > k
unde et lectus genialis quia ibi < gignitur > 1¹ omne aliud preter adulterium
convenium tamen quamvis in tempore Saturni tantum fuerunt, fuerunt
caste et aliqua casta modo reperiri non potest tamen et pactum amicorum
propter uxorem adducendam et pactum sed inde † ... † sponsalia scilicet in
nuptiis nostra tempestate id est in nostro tempore ubi nulla casta est
pecteris quia ornabant se in die nuptiarum magistro optimo pignus anulum
quasi diceret eam sub t ... † certe quasi diceret « aliam nolebas ducere
uxorem ; modo vis et hoc est certe sanus eras sed modo non uxorem
invehitur in eum dicens O Postume ducis etc dic qua Thesiphone quia vis
ducere uxorem, ergo insanus es ; et hoc ponit sub interrogatione, dicens
dic etc ferre quasi diceret « modo liber es, sed uxorem vis ducere que
tibi imperet m sed melius est ut te supendas, » et hoc est ferre etc dominam
mulierem imperiosam salvis tot restibus id est cum fenestre habens quibus
te suspendere possis fenestre unde te precipites caligantes nam de alto
facit oculos caligare Emilius potis unde in Tiberim precipiteris exitus id est
finis Pusio apelativum nomen pueri, unde pusillus parcas lateri id est quod
parcus sis invenire vis id est valuit habe id est labores in agendo, nam
cum laboramus graviter avelamus sed placet quasi diceret « tu cum catha-
mitus uxorem tamen queris, sed scio quare facies quia vis legem Iuliam
adimplere » et est ironia et more satirici de secunda persona se transfert
ad tertiam tollere id est nutrire heredem filium, ille dico tunc cariturus etc
nota quod heredi pete, aves et huius modi mitebant † hered<ibus > † n
carentibus mullorum iubis id est mullis iubatis ; pisces sunt macello locus
est ubi carnes macerantur captatore id est ubi venduntur talia, quibus
hereditates capiuntur quid fieri quasi diceret uxorem queris cum mechus
sis, ergo quid non putes etc et subiungit unde inferat cum dicit si mecho-
rum capistro metafora est ab equo ducta, quemadmodum enim eq<u >us
capistro ligatur et homo dominio mulieris, quasi capistro tenetur cista
nam iste consueverat cum Thimele uxore Latini ; ipsa vere sepe abscon-
derat eum in cista, iterum iste Latinus consueverat cum uxore Neronis
Messalina, propter quod postea periit, unde dicit perituri. quid quod
uxorem querit, cum mechus sit, et castam quod gravit<as > est quia non
potuit reperiri, et hoc est quid quod etc O medici quasi diceret insanus est,
physici dicunt quia vena est in medio capite que si superhabundet sanguine,
dicitur homo insanire medici in medio capite vel moribus id est nimio
sanguine habundante delicias hominis conclamatio est auctoris quasi
diceret deliciosum hominem qui castam querit Tarpeium quasi diceret

k. gingnendo, P.
1. gingnitur, P.
m. imperet ut vid.
n. heredibus, ink splotch.
13
194 IN SATIRAM 6.48-75

adora deos si castam inveneris Tarpeium limen ubi erat templum Iovis
Pauce adeo Bene dicit adora, nam adorandum est si inveneris adeo pauce
sunt, subaudit vitas quas non contingebant, nec caste timeat pater oscula
scilicet ne osculentur ab adulteris vel timeat fugiat, nam in legibus erat
si aliqua puella faceret incestum privaretur oscula patris, et quia ius
ducere uxorem ergo necte postibus coronam nam in nuptiis coronabantur
postes corymbos corinbus proprie est racemus hedere unus posset aliquis
dicere << licet dicas nullam inveniri castam tamen potest nam unus etc
ocius respondetur obiectioni, uno oculo quam uno viro. Magna Alia obiectio
licet in urbe non possit reperiri, potest tamen in rure, et hoc est magna etc
vivat respondetur obiectioni quasi diceret fac ut vivat Gabiis apud civita-
tem illam in argro in villa, vivat fidenis item nomen civitatis, cedo pro
recedo agello paterno id est totam hereditatem meam tibi dimito quis
tamen tu dicis in rure posse inveniri sed tamen quis hoc afirmat stupri
esse actum adeo senuerunt id est defecerunt Iuppiter et Mars id est adul-
teri, ponit eos pro quibuslibet quia notissimi fuerunt adulteri porticibus
quasi diceret quandoquidem tales sunt mulieres ergo ne id est an monstra-
tur invenitur a te porticibus ubi conveniunt tuo voto id est desiderio ut
eam ducas spectacula id est teatra in totis cuneis id est in tuo agmene
ames possis amare securus a rivali excerpere id est eligere chironomon
quasi diceret ocius inde poteris eligere gesticulatricem vel adulteram
quam castam, et hoc est chironomon indeclinabiliter posuit Ledam Leda
mater Helene mecha fuit notissima ; ponit eam pro qualibet Tuscia pro-
prium nomen mulieris vel Tuscia id est aliqua de Tuscia vesice id est libi-
dini Bacillo illa mima molli lascivo Apulo proprium nomen vel de Apulia
gannit id est delirat et ad coitum provocat ; gannire proprie vulpium est
sicut in amplexu id est tamquam esset inter amplexum Timele proprium
nomen pro apelativo subitum id est subito veniens miserabile quia mise-
riam facit longum quia diu expectavit tunc rustica que prius erat rustica
discit amare ast alie ita quedam faciunt mulieres ast alie etc recondita id
est recitata post ludos finitos fora cansarum ° sonant per clamorem vacuo
a populo et postquam Megalesia id est ludi illi nobilissimi cessant, subau-
dit.
Megale civitas in Grecia ubi inventi sunt huius modi ludi, inde ad Troiam
translata a Troia Romam, que sunt Megalesia, scilicet longe a plebeis
id est aliud ignobilium, tunc in quam ille Tristes etc id est larvam tirsum
gestamen lecatoris ; tirus proprie est ramus cum frondibus avulsus subli-
gar id est fasciam que subligabant virilia ne solum essent ad coitum, nam
vox ad coitum debilitatur Acci proprium nomen comedi Urbicus ille
comedus risum mulierum exodio cantilena Atelilane illius comedie gestibus
quos representat Autones illius persone in comedia ducte hunc comedum
Helia quamvis pauper his aliis solvitur ; recingitur fibula subligar ac
magno precio sunt alie que vetent cantare dando premium, qui enim can-
tabant a coitu abstinebant vel assidue coeundo Grisogonum illum minum
Hispulla proprium nomen an expectas huius modi homines amantur sed
sapientes.

o. cansarum, ut vid.
 SOURCES CONSULTED

Works by or about William of Conches

Charma, Antoine. Guillaume de Conches : notice biographique, littéraire

et philosophique. Paris, 1857.
Dronke, Peter. Fabula: Explorations into the Use of Myth in Medieval
Platonism. Leiden, E. J. Brill, 1974.
Flatten, Heinrich. Die Philosophie des Wilhelm von Conches. Koblenz,
Kaiser Wilhelm Universitat, 1929.
Gauthier, R. A. « Les deux recensions du Moralium. » Revue du Moyen
Age Latin 9 ( 1953), 171-76.
- « Un prologue inédit au Moralium. » Revue du Moyen Age Latin
11 ( 1955), 51-58.
Grabmann, Martin. Handschriftliche Forschungen und Mitteilungen
zum Schrifttum des Wilhelm von Conches und zu Bearbeitungen
seiner Naturwissenschaftlichen Werke. » Sitzenberichte der Bayeri
schen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Historiche
Abteilung. Heft 10. Munchen, 1935.
Gregory, Tullio. Anima Mundi: La filosofia di Guglielmo di Conches
e la scuola di Chartres. Firenze, G. C. Sansoni, 1955.
- << Sull'attribuzione a Guglielmo di Conches di un rimaneggiamento
della Philosophia Mundi. » Giornale critico della filosofia Italiano
3rd Ser. 5 ( 1951 ), 119-25.
Hatinguais, J. << En marge d'un poème de Boece. » Congrès de Tours et
de Poitiers. Paris, Association Guillaume Budé, 1954.
« L'homme et son destin: Actes du premier congrès international
de philosophie médiévale. Paris, J. Vrin, 1960.
[ Hunt, Richard ]. « A Fragment of a Manuscript from the Abbey of Saint
Victor at Paris. » Bodleian Library Record 4 ( 1952), 124-26.
Jeauneau, Edouard. Lectio Philosophorum : Recherches sur l'école de
Chartres. Amsterdam, Hakkert, 1973.
O'Neill, Ynez. « William of Conches' Description of the Brain. » Clio
Medica 3 ( 1967), 203-23.
196 SOURCES CONSULTED

Ottaviano, Carmelo. << Un brano inedito della Philosophia di Guglielmo

di Conches. » Archivio di storia della filosofia 1 ( 1932 ), 133-45 and 2
(1933), 16-51 .

Picard-Parra, Clothilde. « Guillaume de Conches et le Dragmaticon

philosophie. » École nationale des Chartes - positions des thèses.
Paris, 1943.
- << Un utilization des Quaestiones Naturales de Sénèque au milieu
du douxième siècle. » Revue du Moyen Age Latin 5 ( 1959 ), 115-26.

Rialdi Giorgio. Il de Philosophia Mundi: la storia, il contenuto medico.

Scientia veterum series no. 82. Genoa, Scientia Veterum, 1965.
Silverstein , Theodore. « Elementatum: Its Appearance among the
Twelfth Century Cosmogonists. >> Medieval Studies 16 ( 1954 ), 156-62.
- << Guillaume de Conches and Nemesius of Emessa. >> In Harry A.
Wolfson Jubilee Volumes. Vol. 2. 3 vols. Jerusalem, American
Academy of Jewish Research, 1965.
- « Guillaume de Conches and the Elements. » Medieval Studies 26
(1965), 363-67.
- << The Tertia Philosophia of Guillaume de Conches. » In Quantu-
lacumque: Studies Presented to Kirsopp Lake. Baltimore, Waverly
Press, 1937.

Thorndyke, Lynn. « More manuscripts of the Dragmaticon and the

Philosophia of William of Conches. » Speculum 20 ( 1945), 84-87.
Vernet, André. << Un remaniement de la Philosophia de Guillaume de
Conches. » Scriptorium 1 ( 1947), 243-59.

William of Conches. Dragmaticon sive de substantiis physicis. Edited by

Gratarolus. Strasburg, 1567. Reprint edition. Frankfurt am Main,
Minerva, 1967.
―― Glosae in Boetium. Paris. Bibliothèque Nationale. Fonds Latin
14380.
- Glosae in Boetium. Excerpts in: Jourdain, Charles. Notes et
extraits de manuscrits de la Bibliothèque impériale. Vol. 20, part 2.
Paris, Imprimerie nationale, 1862.
- Glosae in Iuvenalis Satiras. Baltimore, Walters Art Gallery. 20.
William of Conches. Glosae in Iuvenalis Satiras. Paris. Bibliothèque
Nationale. Fonds Latin. 2904.
― Glosae super Platonem. Edited by Edouard Jeauneau. Paris: J.
Vrin, 1965.
Moralium dogma philosophorum. Edited by John Holmberg.
Uppsala, Almquist and Wiksell's, 1929.
- Philosophicarum et astronomicarum institutionum Guilielmi Hirs-
augiensis libri quattuor. PL 90, 1003-1178 and PL 172, 1-172.
 SOURCES CONSULTED 197

Selected Primary Sources

Arnulfus Aurelianensis. Glosulae super Ovidii Metamorphoseon. in

Fausto Ghisalberti , « Arnolfo d'Orléans, un cultore di Ovidio nel
Secolo XII . » Memorie del Real Istituto Lombardo di Scienze e
Lettere. Classe di lettere, Scienze, morali e storiche, Vol. XXIV,
XV della Serie III, fasc. 4. Milan, 1932.

Bernardus Silvestris . Commentum super Eneidos sex libros. Edited by

G. Riedel. Griefswald, Julius Abel Verlag, 1924.
Bode, G. H., ed. Scriptores rerum mythicarum latini tres. Cellis, Schulze,
1834.

Commentum in Iuvenalem . Oxford, Bodleian Library Auct F. 6. 9.

London, British Museum Royal B XVIII.
- London, British Museum Additional 30861 .

Constantinus Africanus. Opera Constantini Africani. Basle, 1536.

Cramer, A. W., ed. In D. Iunii Iuvenalis Satiras Commentarii vetusti.
Hamburg, 1823.
Fulgentius. Opera. Edited by Rudolph Helm. Lipsiae, Teubner, 1898.
Huygens, R. B. C., ed . Accessus ad auctores, Bernard d'Utrecht, Conrad of
Hirsau. Leiden, E. J. Brill, 1970.

Isidorus Hispalensis . Etimologiarum libri XX. Edited by W. M. Lindsay.

2 vols. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1911.
Israeli, Isaac. Isaac Israeli, a Neoplatonic Philosopher of the Tenth Cen-
tury. Translated by A. Altman and S. M. Stern. London, Oxford
University Press, 1958.
Johannes Scottus Eriugena. Annotationes in Marcianum. Edited by Cora
E. Lutz. Cambridge, Mass, Medieval Academy of America, 1939.
John of Salisbury. Metalogicon. Edited by C. C. J. Webb. Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 1929.
Macrobius . The Saturnalia. Translated by Percival Davies . New York,
Columbia University Press, 1969.
Seneca. Naturales Quaestiones. Translated by W. W. Corcoran. Loeb
Classics Series. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1971.
Servius Grammaticus. Commentarii in Virgilii carmina. Lipsiae, Teubner,
1881-1919.

Wagner, W. G. G. De deteriorum Iuvenalis codicum memoria. Utrech, 1902.

Wessner, Paul, ed. Scholia in Iuvenalem vetustiora. Stuttgart, Teubner,
1967 ; original edition 1931.
Whitbread, Leslie, ed. and trans. Fulgentius the Mythographer. Colum-
bus, Ohio, Ohio State University Press, 1972.
198 SOURCES CONSULTED

Selected Secondary Sources

Bolgar, R. R. The Classical Heritage and its Beneficiaries. Cambridge,

Cambridge University Press, 1954.
- ed. Classical Influences on European Culture (500-1500).
bridge, Cambridge University Press, 1971 .
Centro italiano di studi sull'alto medioevo. Spoleto. Settimane. « La
Cultura antica nell'Occidente Latino. » Spoleto, 1975. (Note parti-
cularly the address by E. Jeauneau, and the article by B. Bischoff. )
2 vols.
Chenu, Marie D. La théologie au XII Siècle. 2nd ed. Paris : J. Vrin 1957.
Also: Translated by Jerome Taylor. Man, Nature and Society in
the Twelfth Century. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1967.
Clagett, Marshall ; Post, Gaines ; and Reynolds, Robert, eds. Twelfth
Century Europe and the Foundations of Modern Society. Madison,
University of Wisconsin Press, 1961.
Courcelle, Pierre. « Étude critique sur les commentaires de la Consolation
de Boece. » AHDL 12 ( 1939), 75-136.
- Late Latin Writers and their Greek Sources. Translated by Harry
E. Wedeck. Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1969.
Delhaye, Philippe. « Gauthier de Chatillon est-il l'auteur du Moralium ? »
Analecta Medievalia Namurcensa 3 ( 1953 ) , 47-53.
- « Grammatica et ethica au XIIe siècle. » Recherches de Théologie
Ancienne et Médiévale ( 1958 ) , pp. 59-110.
Demats, Paul. Fabula : Trois études de mythographie antique et médié-
vale. Genève, Librairie Droz, 1972.
Dronke, Peter. « L'amor che move il sol. >> Studi medievali 3a ser. 6
(1965), 389-422.
- << New Approaches to the School of Chartres. » Anuario de estudios
medievales 6 ( 1971 ) , 117-40.
Duhem, Pierre. Le système du monde. Paris, A. Hermann, 1915. Vol. 3.
Garin, Eugenio. Studi sul Platonismo medievale. Firenze, F. Le Monnier,
1958.
Ghellinck, Joseph de. L'essor de la littérature latine au XIIe siècle.
Bruxelles, L'édition universelle, 1946.
Gregory, Tullio. Platonismo medievale. Studi e richerche. Roma, 1958.
Haskins, Charles H. « Further notes on Sicilian Translations of the Twelfth
Century. >> Harvard Studies in Classical Philology 23 ( 1912), 155-66.
- The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century. Cambridge, Mass., Har-
vard University Press, 1927.
- Studies in the History of Medieval Science, 2d ed. Cambridge,
Mass., Harvard University Press, 1927.
 SOURCES CONSULTED 199

Hunt, Richard W. << The Introductions to the ' Artes ' in the Twelfth Cen-
tury. >> In Studia medievalia in honorem ... R. J. Martin. Bruges,
Éditions « De Tempel », 1948.

Klibansky, Raymond . The Continuity of the Platonic Tradition in the

Middle Ages. London, Warburg Institute, 1939; revised edition, 1950.
- Saturn and Melancholy. London: Nelson, 1964.
Klinck, R. Die Lateinische Etymologie des Mittelalters. Medium Aevum
ser. Bd. 17. München, 1970.
Knoche, Ulrich. « Die Ueberlieferung Iuvenals. » Klassisch-Philologische
Studien, hft. 6 (1926).
Kristeller, Paul O. << The School of Salerno. » Bulletin of the History of
Medicine 17 ( 1945 ), 140-65.
Lawn, Brian. The Salernitan Questions. Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 1963.

Liebeschutz, Hans. Fulgentius Metaforalis. Leipzig, Tebner, 1926.

de Lubac, Henri. Exegese medievale : les quatre sens de l'Écriture.
4 vols. Paris, Aubier, 1959-64.
McKeon, Richard P. << Medicine and Philosophy in the Eleventh and
Twelfth Centuries: The Problem of the Elements. >> The Thomist
24 ( 1961 ), 211-56.
- Poetry and Philosophy in the Twelfth Century. » Modern Philo-
logy 43 ( 1946) , 1-33.
Marti, Beatrice M. << The Manuscripts of Lucan: Accessus and Margi-
nalia. » Speculum 9 ( 1934), 278-295.
Matthais, Ernst. De scholiis in Iuvenalem. In Dissertationes philologicae
halenses. Halle, 1876. Vol. 2.
Meerson, Daniel. << The Ground and Nature of Bernard Silvester's Com-
mentary on the First Six Books of the Aeneid. » Ph. D. dissertation,
University of Chicago, 1967.
Paré, Gérard M. et al. La Renaissance du XII Siècle : les écoles et
l'enseignement. Ottawa, Institut d'Études Médiévales, 1933.
Parent, Jean M. La doctrine de la création dans l'école de Chartres.
Paris-Ottawa, Institut d'Études Médiévales, 1938.
Paris, Bibliothèque Nationale. Département des Manuscrits. Catalogue
général des manuscrits latins. Paris, 1939—.
Quain, E. A. << The Medieval Accessus ad Auctores. » Traditio 3 ( 1945) ,
215-65.

Rashdall, Hastings. The Universities of Europe in the Middle Ages.

Edited and revised by Maurice Powicke. 2d ed . Oxford, Oxford
University Press, 1936.
Reynolds, Leighton D. Scribes and Scholars: The Transmission of Greek
and Latin Literature, London, Oxford University Press, 1968,
200 SOURCES CONSULTED

Seznec, Jean. La survivance des dieux antiques. London, Warburg Ins-

titute, 1940.
Silverstein, Theodore. << The Fabulous Cosmogony of Bernardus Silves-
tris. » Modern Philology 46 ( 1948 ), 92-116.
Smalley, Beryl. English Friars and Antiquity. Oxford, Oxford University
Press, 1960.
Southern, Richard. Medieval Humanism and Other Essays. Oxford,
Basil Blackwell , 1972.
Stock, Brian. Myth and Science in the Twelfth Century. Princeton, Prin-
ceton University Press, 1972.
Van Rooy, Carl A. Studies in Classical Satire and Related Literary Theory.
Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965.
von Berchem, Denis. << Poetes et grammariens . » Museum Helvétique 9
(1952): 79-87.
Wetherbee, Winthrop. Platonism and Poetry in the Twelfth Century.
Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1972.
Whitbread, Leslie. << Conrad of Hirsau. » Speculum 47 ( 1972 ) : 142-168.
Williams, Joseph R. « The Quest for the Author of the Moralium, 1931-
56. » Speculum 32 ( 1957) : 736-47.
Witke, Charles. Latin Satire: The Structure of Persuasion. Leiden :
E. J. Brill, 1970.
 INDEX NOMINUM ET VERBORUM

Ablativus 145. Circumlocutio : 109, 113.

Achilles 95, 113 , 137, 138, 178. Cleopatra : 155.
Actus 119, 121, 142, 168, 169. Clitemnestra : 95, 96.
Adulterium : 104. Clotho 168, 169.
Adverbialiter : 173. Colcus 100.
Aerimantia : 120. Colera 107, 118.
Affrica 137. Comedia : 93.
Agamemnon : 95, 96. Comedus : 173 .
Allegorice 101. Conscientia : 97, 144.
Anima : 160, 162. Constitutio : 103.
Animus 93, 139. Cornutus glossator : 175, 176.
Antheus 172. Crassus 143.
Antifrasim : 143, 160. Crispinus 129, 180.
Antipophora : 96, 174.
Apollo 108. Dativus : 145.
Aquinas oppidum : 89. Dedalus 110, 111 , 168, 172.
Aragne 145. Descriptio : 103.
Ares : 97. Deucalion : 118.
Argumentum 101 , 138, 147, 169. Diascorides : 144.
Ariopagus : 97. Diomedes : 110.
Aristoteles : 141 . Discipulus 101 .
Ars 91 , 116, 118.
Asia : 137. Eacus : 99.
Athamas 100 . Effigenia : 96.
Athena 97. Egeria : 167.
Atropos 168, 169. Egiptus : 89, 103, 104.
Augustinus Episcopus : 109, 120. Egisthus : 96.
Augustus Caesar : 155. Elegus : 93.
Elementum : 98, 155.
Bacchus 91 , 109, 141 , 149. Eliodorus 103, 104, 107, 114, 173.
Bernardus magister : 89. Eneis 123.
Boethius 100, 124, 134, 168, 170. Enphasis : 116.
Bona Dea : 149. Equipollentum : 141, 163.
Britannia : 164. Ethica 90.
Ethna 98.
Calor 93, 99, 103, 106, 118, 121 , 132, Europa : 137.
139, 147. Exametrum : 93.
Carmen : 92.
Caritas 123, 139. Fabula 99, 100, 101 , 110, 119, 120, 136,
Cato : 144. 162, 184, 192.
Causa : 89, 92, 99, 107, 108 , 111, 112, 114, Fabulosum : 99, 101 , 111 , 120, 144.
115, 145, 163, 174, 175, 177. Fides (fabulae) : 169.
Cerberus 136 , 137. Fiducia poetae : 96.
Ceres 91 , 109, 149. Figura 168.
Cesar 143. Figurat : 169.
Cibeles 155, 156. Fingere (poema) : 100.
202 INDEX NOMINUM ET VERBORUM

Flora : 149. Messalina : 104, 184.

Fortuna : 170. Metaphora : 183, 193.
Frixus 100. Metellus 169.
Fronto : 101 . Methaforice : 134.
Minerva 96, 108.
Galba 152, 154. Minos 99, 110, 111 , 168.
Gallia 106, 164. Minotaurus : 110, 111, 168.
Genus : 92. Monicus 100.
Geomantia : 120. Moralis instructio : 90.
Gestus hominum : 90, 173. Musae : 168.
Graccus : 143.
Narratio : 167.
Habitus : 147, 148. Natura 98, 117, 132, 133, 134, 157, 159,
Hannibal : 163. 160, 167, 173.
Helena : 94. Nero 89, 103, 104, 108, 109, 113, 114,
Helle 100. 115, 135, 136, 137, 143, 144, 148, 161,
Hercules 100, 110, 136, 137, 138, 143, 162, 181 , 183, 184, 185.
172. Noe 120.
Hermes 97. Nominativus : 152.
Hilas : 138. Numa Pompilius : 157, 167.
Historia : 95, 108.
Horatius poeta : 110, 176. Otho 152, 154.
Horestes : 94, 95. Ovidius poeta : 113, 153.
Humores : 132.
Palinodia : 90.
Iaso 100, 138. Pan : 160.
Idromantia : 120. Paris panthomimus : 89.
Ieronimus Episcopus, Beatus : 184. Pasiphe : 110, 111.
Imitor 90, 109. Pegasus 173.
Indignatio : 89, 92, 118, 135, 159, 189. Penelope 145.
Ingenium 102, 103, 117, 134, 135, 144, Pentametrum : 93.
172. Perasceve 168.
Integumentum : 108. Periphrasis 102, 147.
Invectio : 90. Perseus : 172.
Iovis : 94. Persius poeta : 108.
Ironia 144, 147, 152, 154, 156, 193. Persona : 123, 137 , 140, 146, 192, 193.
Ironice : 104, 115, 128, 133, 152, 153, 154, Philosophia : 89, 97.
164, 184. Philosophus : 97.
Ironos (orationis suspensio) : 104. Phisicus : 127.
Isidorus 112, 121. Physica 96, 98, 99, 132, 133.
Iugurta 169. Physica nostra : 99.
Pilades 96.
Lachesis 168, 169. Piritous : 94, 100.
Libertas 134 , 135. Piromantia : 120.
Littera (« legendo litteram ») : 166. Pirra : 120.
Logica : 96, 97. Plato philosophus : 92, 133.
Logicus : 97. Poeta 94, 95, 96, 97, 99, 101 , 102, 118
Lucanus poeta : 90, 99, 173. 167, 168.
Lucilius poeta : 102, 138. Poetica : 96, 100.
Poliphemus : 100.
Macrobius : 91. Pompeius : 143.
Marius consul : 109, 143. Preoccupatio : 107, 133.
Mars 97, 100, 144 , 158 159 . Priscianus grammaticus : 180, 184.
Materia : 102, 103 , 118, 119, 134, 167, Proserpina : 95, 150.
175, 192.
Maximianus poeta : 150. Radamanthus : 99.
Mecenas : 114, 115. Ratio : 103, 121 , 166.
Medea 100. Relatus (narratio) : 119, 129.
Menelaus 95, 96. Remus 158, 159.
Mercurius : 97, 107. Reprehensio : 90, 104, 139.
 INDEX NOMINUM ET VERBORUM 203

Represento ( « representare humanum Themis, sors : 120.

gestus ») : 173 . Theseus : 94, 95.
Romulus 158, 159, 167. Thiphys 113, 113, 138.
Topografia : 166.
Sapientia 137, 162, 166. Tragedia : 143.
Satira 90, 92, 102, 103, 110, 111 , 115, Troia 96, 121.
117, 134, 135, 137, 138, 166, 184. Tullius (Cicero) : 124, 166.
Satiricus (<<« more satirici » ) : 193.
Satura : 91. Ulixes 100, 101.
Scientia : 134. Ultio divina : 132.
Scipio Nasica : 174. Utilitas : 89.
Secana : 169.
Semiramis 154, 155.
Seneca 136. Venus 100, 144.
Verisimile : 131 .
Sensus corporis : 119.
Servius grammaticus : 175. Veritas (fabulae) : 90, 101 , 111, 120, 136,
Silla 102, 109, 143. 138, 144, 162, 168.
Simile : 139, 150. Versificantes : 118.
Sincope : 177, 187. Versus : 117, 118.
Sinodoche : 115, 150, 166. Verum, vera : 99, 131 , 137, 163.
Socrates 142 . Virgilius poeta : 152.
Statius : 137. Vulcanus : 98 , 144.
Stoici : 141 , 142.
Suetonius : 181. Wilelmus de Conchis : 89.
1
 INDEX TO THE INTRODUCTORY ESSAYS

Abelard, Peter : 13, 76, 77, 83. Integumentum : 35, 51 , 64-65.

<< Abrupto » Glosses : 37, 38, 39. Isaac Israeli : 84.
Adelard of Bath : 84.
Alberic of Three Fountains : 76. Jeauneau, Edouard : 26, 64-65, 77, 81.
Alfanus of Salerno : 84. Johannitius : 84.
[Anonymous] . Commentarium in Iuve- John of Salisbury : 49, 51 , 61 , 62-63, 75,
nalem. (St. Victor, 12th C.) : 40-44 ; 76, 83, 84.
excerpts : 44-47. Juvenal glosses tradition : 37-41.
Apuleius : 84. Juvenal 66-67.
Aristotle 13, 29, 64, 84.
Khorasmian astronomical tables : 84.
Augustine : 84.
Bartholomeus of Parma : 83. Lawn, Brian : 84.
Bernard of Chartres : 13, 28, 61 , 62- Lectio poetae : 49, 62-64.
Lucan : 84.
64, 75, 76, 83. Lucilius : 51.
Bernard of Clairvaux : 76, 83.
Bernard Silvester : 53, 67, 83. Macrobius : 29, 65, 84.
Boethius 84. Martianus Capella : 84.
Maximianus : 84.
Calcidius : 84.
Charma, Antoine : 77. Neckham, Alexander : 79.
Cicero : 84. Nero : 35.
Clarembaud of Arras : 13, 83.
Conrad of Hirsau : 67. O'Neill , Ynez V.: 26, 79.
Constantinus Africanus : 84. Ovid : 84.
Cornutus, Glosae in Iuvenalem : 37, 38,
39. Paré, G., et al.: 27.
Parent, Jean-Marie : 26.
D'Alverny, M.-T.: 24. Persius : 84.
Diomedes : 29. Petrus Helias : 76.
Dronke, Peter : 26, 65-66, 67, 82. Philosophia : 29, 85.
Plato 13, 85.
Fabula 65-66. Pliny : 84.
Firmicus Maternus : 84. Poole, Reginald L.: 76, 77, 83.
Powicke, H.: 64.
Gregory, Tullio : 77. Ptolemy : 84.
Gilbert of Poitiers : 13, 83. Publilius Syrus : 84.
Gilson, Étienne : 85.
Quaestiones : 36, 63.
Hatinguais, J. : 82.
Heiserman, Arthur : 14. Radulphus de Longo Campo : 83.
Henry II, King of England : 75, 76, 83. Rashdall , Hastings : 64.
Herman of Carinthia : 83. Reportatio : 11 , 27, 33, 36, 44. 63, 64.
Holmberg, John : 84. Revision. Theories of.: 22-23, 25-27, 35-
Horace 84. 37.
Hugh of St. Victor : 83. Rhetoric : 66-67.
Hunt, Richard W.: 40-41. Ross, W. Braxton : 14.
206 INDEX NOMINUM ET VERBORUM
Salernitan medicine and science : 84-85.
Sallust : 84.
Sanford, Eva M. : 37, 42.
Satire ; characteristics : 51-52 ; general
considerations : 53 ; theory of satire :
66-67.
Scholia in Iuvenalem vetustiora : 29,
38, 40.
Seneca : 84.
Silverstein, Theodore : 14, 61.
Southern, Richard W.: 76, 77.
Terence : 84.
Theophilus 84.
Thierry of Chartres : 83-84.
Triplex lectio : 12, 67-68.
Trivet, Nicholas : 83.
Virgil : 84.
Wessner, Paul : 38.
Wetherbee, Winthrop : 61 , 82.
William of Champeaux : 77, 83.
William of Conches : 28 , 36-37, 49, 52-
62, 63, 67, 75-86 ; critical theory and
method : 50, 52-62, 64-66 ; sources of
philosophic and scientific ideas : 84-
85, 86.
William of Conches. Attr. Compendium
philosophiae : 22.
William of Conches. De philosophia
Mundi 30-32, 49, 78-79.
William of Conches : Dragmaticon :
25-26, 49, 75, 79.
William of Conches. Glosae in Boe-
tium : 26, 33-34, 49, 81-82.
William of Conches. Glosae in Iuvena-
lem accessus : 28 ; Paris, manus-
cript : 23-24 ; relationship and inter-
action of the Glosses with the
Satires : 66-68, 69-74 ; relationship of
the manuscripts and their texts : 22-
23, 25, 28-37 ; sources : 36-37, Walters
manuscripts : 18-23.
William of Conches. Glosae in Macro-
bium 49, 65, 82.
William of Conches. Glosae in Priscia-
num : 49.
William of Conches. Glosae super Plato-
nem : 80-81.
William of Conches. Moralium dogma
philosophorum : 79-80.
William of St. Thierry : 76, 79, 83 .
 INDEX AUCTORUM
A WILELMO DE CONCHIS LAUDATORUM

Augustinus Episcopus, Beatus : 109, 120. Novum Testamentum : Matt.: 108 , 123,
142 ; II Cor.: 97 ; Ad Phil. : 101.
Bernardus Silvestris : 93.
Boethius 134, 168, 170. Ovidius : 113, 120, 149, 153.
Cornutus glossator : 98, 175, 176. Plato 92, 133.
Priscianus : 180, 184.
Dioscorides : 144.
Diomedes : 90. Sallustius : 169.
Scholia in Iuvenalem vetustiora : 93,
Fulgentius : 137, 145. 94, 102, 113, 116, 135, 143, 147, 152.
Servius 175.
Horatius : 108, 176. Statius 137.
Suetonius 181 .
Ieronimus Episcopus, Beatus : 184.
Isidorus Hispalensis : 94, 97, 98, 112, Terentius : 149.
113, 121 , 148, 150. Tullius Cicero : 124, 166.
Lucanus 90, 99, 173. Vetus Testamentum : Exodus : 102 ;
Leviticus : 167.
Macrobius 91. Virgilius 93, 94, 95, 152.
Maximianus : 150.
Mythographus primus : 100. Wilelmus de Conchis : 97, 99, 100, 124,
Mythographus tertius : 137. 133, 145, 155.
 IMPRIMERIE A. BONTEMPS
LIMOGES (FRANCE)
Dépôt légal : 4e trimestre 1980

7477

155F82 013 PB
2 7102
 UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN

3 9015 01312 9906