--> ]> Work in Progress Thomas Aquinas, In Sent., book I, and De potentia; Richardus Rufus, Sententiae Parisienses, prologue and book I Vat. Borgh. 362 Vaticano (Città del), Biblioteca apostolica vaticana, codex Borghesianus 362

Record prepared by: Jennifer Ottman, 29 May and 1 June 2015. File name: VatBorgh362.txt

The Vatican purchased the collection of the Roman Borghese family, that included many manuscripts from the Pontifical library at Avignon, in 1891.

iii, 12, 2–812, 910 | 108

MS 1: Thomas Aquinas, In Sent. I, fol. 4-95.

MS 2: Richard Rufus, Sententia Parisiensis, fol. 97-104.

Parchment.

Spine: At top, pasted stamp with border of little blue crosses or florets, two handwritten lines in center, “362” and “D. 4.” Between first two cords, attached paper rectangle with contents label in early modern hand, “ANONYMI, Quaestiones Theologicae, COD. MEM. Saec. XIV”; someone else added between the lines, between “ANONYMI” and “Quaestiones,” something that is not very legible but could be “(Sancti Thomae).” Between last two cords, pasted paper stamp with “Borghes. 362.”

Front cover: Written in ink at top, in an early modern hand, “Quaestiones theologicae.” Slightly further down on the left side, in heavy pencil (?), different hand, “362.”

Inside front cover: Paper pastedown. In upper left corner, pasted paper stamp with “Borghes. 362.” A sheet of modern ruled paper covers most of the pastedown and has two notes. First, in an eighteenth- or nineteenth-century hand,
      “Anonymi, Quaestiones theologicae. Codice Membranaceo del Secol. XIV, infra quid”
Then after skipping three lines, in a different, nineteenth- or early twentieth-century hand:
      “Dopo le tre prime carte incomincia un Trattato, o Commento di S. Tommaso d’Aquino sul ⟨sul — Sententiarum s. lin. V⟩ 1º Libro Sententiarum, che nel codice non ha titolo, ma che nell’ultima carta del medesimo è attribuito al Santo ⟨corr. (s. lin.) ex: medesimo V⟩ da scrittore sincrono, ma non della mano, nè dell’inchiostro, con cui fu scritto il cod. stesso. Quindi si legge a mala pena, per essere sbiadita la scrittura dall’umidità, quanto segue
      “‘Istud scriptum fratris thomae de aquino super primum sententiarum completum et verax est, Petri ⟨Petri Rogerii corr. (s. lin.) ex: P. Roger ... (ellipsis in original) V⟩ Rogerii de malo monte monachi ⟨corr. (s. lin.) ex: monachus V⟩ casae dei quod emit anno domini MºCCCXXIIII die dominica in octavis beate marie. pretio LV ⟨add. sed del. libris torne V⟩ l (ibrarum) ⟨sic, pro: (librarum) V⟩ tornensium de quodam fr. Hermanno monacho.’ L. Passarini”

Front flyleaves: Three paper flyleaves that look like they have suffered some of the same dampness as the rest of the manuscript.

Inside back cover: Paper pastedown partly disintegrated from damp at spine, showing ends of two cords for attaching cover to spine, one on either side of center, and sort of papier-m&acircum;che padding underneath. Judging by ridges on spine, the two visible cords are the center two of four, but the ends of the other two appear to have broken off.

Back flyleaves: There are no currently existing back flyleaves, but there are shreds of paper at the spine that might be the remains of them, disintegrated from damp, or that might be disintegrated binding padding.

Modern stamped foliation at bottom right recto. There is also a medieval foliation that skips the initial question list and counts the modern folio 2 as the first folio, but this foliation, which uses Roman numerals in the center of the top margin, appears only on modern folios 2–3 and 14–15. It is possible that it was lost elsewhere when the pages were trimmed, but it seems more likely that it was only ever added to these pages, as an aid to the reader looking for the continuation of the De potentia (see the note on fol. 3v below).

MS 1, fol. 1-95

Contents

The manuscript appears to have begun with the two Sentences commentaries, by Aquinas and Rufus. These two probably originated as separate manuscripts, but they were together by 1324 (see the note on fol. 104v and the quotation of that note on the front pastedown). The missing part of Rufus’&s commentary, however much of it originally existed, was also presumably gone by that time. At some point after the two commentaries were brought together, a third scribe added the question list at the beginning and copied the De potentia into available space left over amid and around the two Sentences commentaries.

1. Medieval question list by distinction for book I of the Sentences, fol. 1ra–2ra

This list presumably belongs with Aquinas’s Sentences commentary, but the scribe and the enthusiastic rubricator seem to be the ones who worked on the De potentia.
If this question list is counted, the second folio, fol. 2ra, begins, “xxxviii. [branch diagram] Utrum scientia Dei sit causa rerum.”

Content Notes preceded by folio number:

1r, round “BIBLIOTHECA APOSTOLICA VATICANA” stamp in bottom margin

1r, illegible note (erased/faded) across bottom margin

2. Thomas Aquinas, De potentia, fol. 2rb–3vb, 14rb–vb, 95va–96vb, 97r–v in margine

Incipit, fol. 2rb: “Deinde quaeritur utrum possit sciri ab homine quando motus caeli finitur. Videtur quod sic, quia in fine De causis, 32 ⟨32 capitulo add. (s. lin.) pos. sexta V⟩ capitulo, dicitur sexta aetas et ultima ⟨corr. (s. lin.) ex: ut V⟩ ab adventu Christi usque ad finem mundi. Sed scitur quantum praecedentes aetates duraverunt. Ergo sciri potest quantum ista potest durare per comparationem ad alias.”
Second folio, fol. 3ra: “in homine est a principio incorruptibili, scilicet anima rationali. In brutis autem est a principio corruptibili. Ideo corpus sensibile hominis in perpetuum potest remanere, non autem corpus sensibile bruti.”
Explicit, fol. 97v in margine: “Ad xv dicendum quod in nulla creatura est virtus quae possit vel de nihilo aliquid facere vel ad nihilum redigere. Quod autem creaturae in nihilum redigerent, Dei conservatione cessante, hoc non esset per aliquam actionem creaturae, sed per defectum.”

This work is written in a less formal script, as compared to Aquinas’s Sentences commentary in this manuscript, and is heavily rubricated, with paragraph marks, underlining of questions, and underlining of authorities, but has no decorative initials and no use of blue ink.

Content Notes preceded by folio number:

2r, note in top margin: “De hac materia, utrum motus caeli quandoque deficiat, xiiii pecia”

2v, note in top margin: “De hoc, utrum cessante motu caeli elementa remaneant, xv pecia, et utrum cessante motu caeli remaneat actio et passio in elementis.”

3v, note in bottom right corner, apparently by the scribe of the main text: “Verte usque ad xiii folium et invenies residuum.”

3. Thomas Aquinas, In Sent., book I, fol. 4ra–14rb, 15ra–95va

Incipit, fol. 4ra: “‘Ego sapientia effudi flumina, ego quasi trames aquae immensae de fluvio. Ego quasi fluvius Dorix et sicut aquae ductus exivi de Paradiso. Dixi, “Rigabo ortum plantationum et inebriabo portus mei fructum”,’ Eccli. 24. Inter multas sententias quae a diversis de sapientia prodierunt, quid scilicet esset vera sapientia, unam singulariter veram et firmam Apostolus protulit, dicens, ‘Christum Dei virtutem et Dei sapientiam, quia etiam nobis a Deo ⟨add. nobis V⟩ factus est sapientia’, I Cor. 1.”
Second folio, fol. 5ra: “ideo sapientia est scientia et intellectus, cum scientia sit de conclusionibus, intellectus de principiis.”
Explicit, fol. 95va: “Ad quod dicendum quod hoc tenet in his quae naturali cognitione cognoscimus, quae ex sensu principium sumit. Sed in his quae per fidem cognoscimus, nostra cognitio ipsi veritati primae innititur. Unde oportet quod a prima veritate, quae est Deus, in ea quae ab ipso sunt procedamus ad similitudinem cognitionis quam sancti in Verbo habebunt, ubi et verbum et res plene cognoscunt, cuius cognitionis nos participes faciet ipsum Verbum Dei Filius, qui hanc cognitionem in nobis per fidem nuntiavit. Cui est honor et gloria per infinita saeculorum saecula. Amen. Amen. Amen. [last two Amen are written on either end of line, with dashes between them, clearly marking end of text]”

This work is written in a more formal script and has alternating red and blue initials, each decorated in the other color, and alternating red and blue paragraph marks. There are frequent illegible pencil notes in the margins and two sets of marginal distinction numbers in ink, small Roman numerals in the upper left corners of the verso pages and larger Arabic numerals in the upper right corners of the recto pages, usually but not always preceded by “.d.”, and sometimes also appearing in the upper left verso. Neither set appears consistently, but many of the small Roman numerals may well have been cut off in trimming, while the larger Arabic markings look more likely to have been inconsistent in the first place.

The text breaks off about two-thirds of the way down 14rb, apparently at the end of distinction 3, and resumes at the beginning of distinction 4 with the start of the next quire on 15ra.

Content Notes preceded by folio number:

14rb, note in the space left in the column between the end of the first section of this text and the resumption of the De potentia, apparently by neither main scribe: “Hic videtur defectus, nec sequens quaestio est de libro isto.”

55r, round blue “BIBLIOTHECA APOSTOLICA VATICANA” stamp in bottom margin

MS 2, fol. 97-104

1. Richardus Rufus, Sententiae Parisienses, prologue, fol. 97ra–97rb

Incipit, fol. 97ra: “‘Altissimus creavit medicinam’. Verbum istud scribitur Eccli. 38, quod etsi contineat verborum ⟨verbum V⟩ paucitatem, habet tamen in se non modicam sententiae profunditatem. Praedicti verbi sententia complectitur universaliter omne illud circa quod versatur Sacra Scriptura ⟨criptura V⟩.”
Explicit, fol. 97rb: “Sic igitur patet qualiter in significatis quattuor praedictorum vocabulorum non solum insinuatur nobis materia quattuor librorum, sed etiam modus agendi et divisio libri, quibus praecognitis in generali, magna datur via ad descendendum et considerandum caetera in speciali. Ante tamen quam descendamur, possunt breviter ⟨illegibilis V⟩ aliqua per modum quaestionis praelibari quae consueverunt quaeri ⟨quaeri etc. illegibilis V⟩ etc.”

Other manuscripts: Berlin, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin — Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Theol. lat. qu. 48, fol. 87va–88rb; Vaticano (Città del), Biblioteca apostolica vaticana, Vat. lat. 12993, fol.1ra–2ra.
Text available at: Koch, pp. 14–16. (This manuscript was not used in the edition.)

Rufus’ Sentences commentary is in a third hand, on the informal side but different from the one for the De potentia, and has no rubrication and no decorative initial capitals, although spaces are left for them. There is a great deal of water damage or smudging.

2. Richardus Rufus, Sententiae Parisienses, book I, fol. 97va–104vb (incomplete)

Incipit, fol. 97va: “‘Cupientes aliquid de penuria’. Totali libro praemittit Magister prologum in quo tangit causas suscepti operis. Dividitur autem in duas partes. In prima parte ponit rationes quae moverunt ipsum ad aggrediendum praesens negotium sive opus. In secunda, rationes quae debent movere discipulos ad benigne et libenter audiendum, ibi circa finem, ‘In quo maior’ etc., ubi incipit alloqui auditores.”
Second folio, fol. 98ra: “utinam, id est veritas. Ecclus. 4, ‘Non contradicamus verba veritatis nullo modo’.”
Explicit ex abrupto, fol. 104vb: “Responsio. Quidam ⟨Quid V⟩ dicunt quod hoc nomen ‘Deus’ proprie significat naturam et supponit [per] personam ⟨persona V⟩ aliquando unam, ut cum dicitur, ‘Deus generat’; aliquando plures, ut cum dicitur, ‘Deus est Trinitas’. Et ratio istorum est quod cum habeat multa supposita, habet naturam divini communis. Proprie supponit quidem, ut ⟨ut dicunt] in dicit V⟩ dicunt, duo. Pro natura vero vel forma non supponit proprie nisi translatur, ut si dicatur, ‘homo est spiritus’. Sic dicunt et in proposito. Alii dicunt quod proprie supponit.”

Other manuscripts: Berlin, Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin — Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Theol. lat. qu. 48, fol. 88rb–157rb (abbreviation/adaptation); Vaticano (Città del), Biblioteca apostolica vaticana, Vat. lat. 12993, fol. 3ra–130vb.

Content Notes preceded by folio number:

104v, heavily damaged note in bottom margin: “Istud scriptum fratris Thomae de Aquino super Primum Sententiarum completum et verax est. ... quod emit anno Domini ... die dominica in octavis beatae ...”

104v, blue round “BIBLIOTHECA APOSTOLICA VATICANA” stamp in bottom margin

Physical Description:

Parchment codex.

Dimensions: For quires 1–9 (fol. 1–96), 276–278 mm x 198–202 mm. For quire 10 (SPar, fol. 97–104), 268 mm x 192 mm.

Collation:

Quires: 12, 2–812, 910, 108

Hair side out for quires 1–2. Flesh side out for quires 3–10. Quire breaks correspond to content breaks insofar as Aquinas’s Sentences commentary is contained within quires 2–9 and Rufus’s commentary is contained within quire 10. The De potentia spills over the boundary between quires 1 and 2, reappears at the end of quire 3, and spills over the boundary between quires 9 and 10.

A catchword appears only at the end of quire 3 (fol. 26v).

Layout:

Written below the top line, in double columns.

For Aquinas, De potentia:
      54 lines per page.
      Column height: 234 mm.
      Inside column width: 84 mm.
      Outside column width: 83 mm.
      Distance apart: 5 mm.
              Top margin: 20 mm.
              Bottom margin: 24 mm.
              Inside margin: 14 mm.
              Outside margin: 12 mm.

      For Aquinas, In Sent.:
      64 lines per page.
      Column height: 217 mm.
      Inside column width: 70 mm.
      Outside column width: 68 mm.
      Distance apart: 10 mm.
              Top margin: 18 mm.
              Bottom margin: 41 mm.
              Inside margin: 22 mm.
              Outside margin: 32 mm.

      For Rufus, SPar:
      51 lines per page.
      Column height: 202 mm.
      Inside column width: 64 mm.
      Outside column width: 64 mm.
      Distance apart: 8 mm.
              Top margin: 18 mm.
              Bottom margin: 48 mm.
              Inside margin: 18 mm.
              Outside margin: 38 mm.

Framing: Column frame: Single. Margin divider: Single.

Pricking marks (horizontal): Visible in quire 6 (fol. 51–62). Marks for vertical lines not visible.

Bibliography

Koch, J., “Einleitung,” in Meister Eckhart, Die deutschen und lateinischen Werke: Die lateinischen Werke, vol. 5, pt. 1, Collatio in libros Sententiarum; Quaestiones parisienses; Sermo die B. Augustini Parisius habitus; Tractatus super oratione dominica, Stuttgart 1936, pp. 3–16, at pp. 9–16. Raedts, P., Richard Rufus of Cornwall and the Tradition of Oxford Theology, Oxford 1987, pp. 40–47.