Opera 7: Expositio super Danielem 2503500374, 2503500382, 2503030009

Citation preview

CORP\'"S CHRISTIANORVM Continuatio .lvf.ediaeualis

LIIIF

ANDREAE DE SANCTO VICTORE OPERA TOMVS VII

TVRNHOLTI TYPOGRAPHI BREPOLS EDITORES PONTIFICII MCMXC

ANDREAE DE SANCTO VICTORE OPERA VII EXPOSITIONEM SVPER DANIELEM EDIDIT

MARCVS ZIER

TVRNHOLTI TYPOGRAPHI BREPOLS EDITORES PONTIFICII MCMXC

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The appearance of this edition would not have been possible without the support of my friends and colleagues, as well as the liberal financial support provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. I am grateful to the librarians of the following institutions who allowed me to consult their manuscripts: Wtirttembergische Landesbibliothek, Stuttgart; University Library, Cambridge; Bibliotheque nationale, Paris; and Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vatican City. I owe a special debt of gratitude to the late Beryl Smalley who first suggested to me the text edited herein, and to Professor Leonard E. Boyle who contributed his expertise and tireless support to the formative stages of the project. I would also like to thank Professor James P. Reilly Jr., Mr. Russell Grundy (t) and Mr. William Anderson (t) who deserve mention for their confidence in the ultimate completion of this work. Finally, I would be remiss if I did not express my gratitude to my wife, Beverley McCallister, who has been a most constant companion to me in the sojourn through the terra still relatively incognita of the study of the Bible in the Middle Ages. Mark A. Zier University College, Toronto

INTRODUCTION Until the advent of modern historical criticism, few moments in the history of Christian exegesis have displayed the concern and respect for the Jewish interpretation of Scripture that are apparent in the works of the Victorines. Most notable for his willingness to accept Jewish opinions even on points which Christian tradition had universally accepted as Christological prophecy, Andrew of St. Victor, student of Hugh and colleague of Richard, has given modern scholarship a glimpse of the kind of Jewish-Christian dialogue that was taking place in midtwelfth century Paris. The present edition provides an example of Andrew's more mature work, composed probably during his second sojourn at the Abbey of St. Victor, ea. n55-n62. (1) THE MANUSCRIPTS STUTTGART, Hlurttembergische Landesbibliothek, MS HB.IV.6 (saec.

xn/xm) The best witness to the text, T comes from the Benedictine monastery of St. Martin at Weingarten near Ravensberg in the diocese of Constance. Weingarten had been founded in ro56 by Guelf IV, the maternal grandfather of Frederick Barbarossa, and became one of the first houses to embrace the reforms introduced at Hirsau. (2) It would appear that the manuscript came to the Konigliche Hofbibliothek most likely during the :--.Japoleonic Secularization, and thence to the Landesbibliothek in 1902. The codex is composed of vellum, 270 x 175 mm, in i + 199 ff., bound at Weingarten between wooden boards covered with white leather. The relatively unembellished text is written in two columns of 44 lines. Quires are as follows: 1-58 , 6 1 ; 7-n8 , 12 7 ; 13-168 , 1]6, r8 7 ; 19-208 , 21 3 ; 22-26 8 , 27 6 • The truncated quires, together with repeated sequences of quire marks, indicate that the codex was put together in five sections: the first, containing Andrew on the Heptateuch and Kings, ends with the single folio of the sixth quire; the second, containing Andrew on the Minor Prophets, ends with the twelfth; Andrew on Isaiah occupies quires 13 through 18; Andrew on Jeremiah occupies quires 19 through 21; and finally, Andrew, Jerome (and a third anonymous commentator) on Daniel, and four other miscellaneous works occupy the fifth section.

(r) B. SMALLEY, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, pp. rr4-u5. (2) Erich K6NIG, Die siiddeutschen Weifen als Klostergriinder: Vorg,eschichte und Anfiinge der Abtei Weingarten (Stuttgart r934), especially pp. 16-20.

VIII

INTRODUCTION

Four vellum "tabs" correspond to four items given in a brief index on the inside front cover: (a) commentaries on the historical books of the Bible at f. i, (b) commentaries on the prophets at f. 90, (c) Jerome at f. 179, and (d) Augustine at f. 185. H. BOESE, Die H andschriften der ehemaligen koniglichen H ofbibliothek Stuttgart. 2,1: Codices biblici. Codices dogmatici et polemici. Codices hermeneutici (Stuttgart 1975), pp. 131-132. K. LOFFLER, Geschichte der W iirttembergischen Landesbibliothek. Beihejte zum Z entralblatt fiir Bibliothekswesen 50 (Leipzig 1923), pp. 70-72.

The contents are as given in Andreae de Sancto Victore Opera I: Expositio super H eptateuchum, Ch. Lohr and R. Berndt, eds., CCCM 53 (Turnholt 1986 ), pp. xiv-xv. I am especially grateful to Fr. Berndt for graciously calling my attention to this manuscript. ff. 2r-31v ff. 32r-42v ff. 43r-89r

ff. 9or-134r

ff. 135r-153v

ff. 154r-165v

ff. 165v-178v ff. ff. ff. ff. ff.

178v-184v 185r-v 186r-187r 187r-19rr 19rr-199r

Andrew of St. Victor, Super H eptateuchum (eds. Ch. LOHR and R. BERNDT, CCCM 53, Turnhout 1986) Idem, In IV Regum (RB 1302-1305) Idem, In XII prophetas (RB 1317-1328) The In Ionam has been edited by A. PENNA in "Andrea di San Vittore. 11 suo commenta a Giona", Biblica 36 (1955), 305-331. Idem, Super Isaiam (RB 1312) This copy of Andrew's Super Y saiam augments the list given by Stegmueller. The text has not been published in its entirety, though excerpts have appeared in B. SMALLEY, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, and in the thesis of G. HADFIELD, "Andrew of St. Victor, a Twelfth Century Hebraist: An Investigation of his Works and Sources" (Oxford 1972). Idem, Super Ieremiam (RB 1313) This copy of Andrew's Super Ieremiam also augments the list given by Stegmueller. Idem, Super Danielem (RB 1315) Jerome, In Danielem (ed. F. GLORIE, CCSL 75, Turnhout 1964) Idem, Liber illustrium uirorum Augustine, De haeresibus Anonymous, In Danielem Ps.-Augustine, Contra V haereses Anonymous, Glossa super Iohannem

From the point of view of the present edition, the most interesting codicological feature of the manuscript is the collocation of Andrew and Jerome on Daniel (with a third anonymous commentary on Daniel found later on). This type of collocation occurs in no other manuscript containing Andrew

INTRODUCTION

IX

on Daniel, but echoes in a muted fashion the striking arrangement of the commentaries of Jerome and Andrew on Ezechiel in Paris, Bibl. nat., MS lat. 14432, a twelfth century Victorine manuscript, where the commentaries are interlaced. (3 ) CAMBRIDGE, Pembroke College, MS 45 (saec. xm) C is the only manuscript of this work of English provenance. It is composed of vellum, 330 x 220 mm, in i + 135 ff., written in double columns of 40 lines in an English hand of the second quarter of the thirteenth century. The codex is covered with white leather over old boards, once closed by a red strap (now broken), attached to the boards with two small nails. There is a trace of a title along the spine. A chain loop noted by James at the top of the front cover is now missing. The MS comes from the royal Benedictine foundation of St. Edmund at Bury. On the verso of the flyleaf is a fifteenth century notice of the contents: Liber Sancti Edmundi Regis in qua continetur Pastille Andree canonici Sancti Victoris super ysayam Ieremiam et Danielem. JAMES, A Descriptive Catalogue of the Manuscripts in the Library of Pembroke College, Cambridge (Cambridge 1905), pp. 44-45.

M.R.

Andrew of St. Victor, Super Y saiam (RB 1312) Beda, Excerpta De temporum ratione (JoNES, Bedae Opera, CCSL 123B, pp. 305-310) The excerpt from Bede is not taken from De rerum natura as the MS ascription indicates, but rather from De temporum ratione 9, presenting Bede's remarks in a somewhat condensed form. The error of this ascription is a common one. This excerpt also follows Andrew's commentary on Isaiah in V. ff. 76r-1nr Andrew of St. Victor, Super Ieremiam (RB 1313) ff. 1nr-135v Idem, Super Danielem (RB 1315)

ff. rr-75v f. 75v

After T, C gives the best witness to the text of the Expositio super Danielem. It contains the whole text and reveals only seven homoeoteleuta, six of which occur within a span of six folia (ff. 121v-127v). VATICAN CITY, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, MS Vat. lat 1053 (saec. xrn in fine) The codex is composed of parchment, 268 x 194 mm, in ii + 380 ff. (ff. 339 and 356 written twice; hence foliation renders (3) See the description given by Michael SIGNER in his edition of Andrew, In Ezechielem, CCCM, sub prelo.

X

INTRODUCTION

only 378 ff.). There are two modern endleaves at either end. The text is written in two columns of 52 lines. V seems first to have belonged to Cardinal John de Murro, OFM (d. 1313), from whom it passed to the Franciscans of Fabriano in the province of Ancona, as brother James of Fabriano tells us (ea. 1320) on f. iiv. From thence it passed to the Vatican Library. The codex is written in a number of Parisian book hands, though manus sexta bears some affinities to the papal chancery hand. A. PELZER, Codices Vaticani Latini 2.1 (Vatican City 1931), pp. 590-596.

The contents of the MS are given by Lohr and Berndt, CCCM 53, pp. xv-xvi. The following annotated description correlated with Pelzer's enumeration gives a sense of their comprehensiveness. ff. rr-71v ff. 71v-79r

Andrew of St. Victor, Genesis through Paralipomenon (RB 1295-1306); Pelzer 1 Idem (? ), Chronologies (RB 1307); Pelzer 2-6 Lohr and Berndt ascribe the five short biblical chronologies here to Andrew, and they are found in other MSS containing Andrew's known works. The first of these chronologies is a table of regnal concordances found under the name of Richard of St. Victor in PL 196.247248. The second piece is an elucidation of the first up to the destruction of the northern kingdom. The third, to which Pelzer gives the title De H ebraeorum principibus rebusque gestis post Moysen usque ad Agrippam II, is a listing with brief descriptions of high priests from the return under J eshua, down to the destruction of the Second Temple, giving as well a list of pagan kings. This work is found in three other MSS that contain Andrew on Kings: Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MSS 30 and 315; and Paris, Bibl. nat., MS lat. 14803. Its collocation with Andrew's known works, together with its focus on chronology, one of Andrew's favorite topics, is enough to make a reasonably sure ascription to Andrew. To the fourth piece Pelzer gives the title Chronicon secundum mundi aetates divisum ab Adam usque ad Martianum et Valentinianum. This work is largely a condensation of Bede's Chronica majora (= De temporum ratione 66, ed. C.W. JONES, CCSL 123B, pp. 463-535). The last portion of this opusculum seems rather to be an expansion than an abbreviation. These chronologies are concluded by an excerpt from Isidore of Seville's Etymologies 5.37-38, PL 82.222-223B, treating measures of time calculated in years (e.g. olympiad, etc).

INTRODUCTION

ff. 105r-n4v

ff. n4v-n7v ff. n8r-151v

ff. 152r-186r ff. 187r-26ov ff. 26rr-332r ff. 333r-377r

f. 377r ff. 377v-378r

XI

Andrew of St. Victor, Expositio proverbiorum salomonis (RB 1308); In Ecclesiasten (G. CALANDRA, ed., Palermo 1948); Pelzer 7 Anonymous, Expositio ystorica cantici canticorum (RB 13n); Pelzer 8 This remarkable little commentary in which the author cites the Bible by the standard chapter divisions (though not by section; hence probably mid-thirteenth century) gives many Jewish sources and names the rabbi - the sign of a Hebraist of some competence. As Smalley has noted (4 ), the prologue is taken nearly verbatim from Rashi citing even the same midrashim: Canticum canticorum dicitur quod excellit alia cantica uncle dicitur rabi eliecer quod rex quidam tradidit tercium frumenti pistori suo ut inde faceret ei panem. Fecit ex illo frumento primo panem nigrum et grossum pro familia; alium fecit subtiliorem pro armigeris et militibus; tertium fecit de simila quasi panem regium. Sic solomon de sapientia sibi data fecit primo prouerbia pro insipientibus; secundo ecclesiasten pro militibus proficientibus, et mundi contempnentibus; tercio cantica pro perfectis quasi pro ipse rege. Bernard of Clairvaux, Excerpta sermonum in Canticum (ed. J. LECLERCQ, Rome 1957); Pelzer 9 Andrew of St. Victor, In Ezechielem (ed. M.A. SIGNER, CCCM sub prelo); Introitus in prophetas (RB 1316); Pelzer 10 Richard of St. Victor, In uisionem Ezechielem (RB 7337); Pelzer II Andrew of St. Victor, Expositio super Danielem (RB 1315), In XII prophetas (RB 1317-1328); Pelzer 12 Richard of St. Victor, In Apocalypsim (RB 7343); Pelzer 13 Andrew of St. Victor, Super I saiam (RB 1312); Pelzer 14 Bede, Excerpta de temporum ratione 9.19/n3 (CCCSL 123B, pp. 305-310); Pelzer 15 Anonymous, Super Lamentationum primam (RB n465); Pelzer 16

The quire marks reveal that the text was considerably reshuffled prior to the present binding. With the exception of the Isaiah commentary, all of Andrew's works, together with the anonymous chronologies, are written in the same hand (manus prima). The other items in the first volume (Pelzer 8, 9, II, 13)

(4) Smalley, p. 353.

XII

INTRODUCTION

are each written in a different hand. Pelzer 14-16 form a second volume, with items 14 and 15 in the same hand. (5 ) At first blush the impact of V on the dissemination of Andrew's opinions is difficult to assess. It is ironic but unfortunate that the manus prima of V, perhaps the most interesting codex from a palaeographical point of view, has produced one of the worst witnesses to the text of Andrew's commentaries, as all of Andrew's modern editors have noted. Fortunately, John de Murro, perhaps the first owner of the manuscript, was himself responsible for a commentary on the book of Daniel. By a twist of good luck this text was printed among the works of Thomas Aquinas in the Vives edition. (6 ) John received his Baccalaureate in 1283 and was regent master at Paris 1289-1290, and thereafter a lector with the papal curia. From 1296-1304 he was Master General, OFM, and appointed Cardinal in 1302. His commentary on Daniel exists in only one MS, now Paris, Bibl. nat., MS lat. 366, in which he cites Andrew by name at least five times. His references to the Expositio super Danielem can be found in what has been called the apparatus "ramorum". PARIS, Bibliotheque nationale, MS lat. 574 (saec. xv)

P is a smallish book of 154 ff., 215 x 145 mm, bound between wooden boards written in four hands. The absence of quire signatures and the rather tight binding make it very difficult to determine quires. There are no pastedowns. The nailholes in the cover suggest two straps for closing the codex and some metalwork in the corners of the cover that is now missing. In the center of the front cover is the impression of a leather stamp in the form of five concave diamond figures, the stamp of Ferdinand I, King of Naples. The codex is composed mostly of parchment, but some paper. The first eight folia have been trimmed so that the writing frame occupies virtually the entire page. In the balance of the MS the writing frame remains constant, although the number of lines varies greatly according to the hand. The first two volumes are written in three humanist hands, while that of the third volume approximates a thirteenthcentury Italian rotunda. The text is written in a single column throughout, and in the third volume, in 37 lines per column. Copied by the Dominicans perhaps at Venice around 1461, the codex found its way into the library of Ferdinand I at Naples. With the conquest of Naples by the French at the end

(5) For a more detailed description of V, see M. SIGNER, In E~chielem (CCCM, sub prelo). (6) Opera Omnia 3r, S.E. FRETTE, ed. (Paris r876), pp. r95-28r; RB 4820.

INTRODUCTION

XIII

of the fifteenth century, it migrated to Paris where it has remained. P. LAUER, Catalogue general des manuscrits latins (Bibliotheque nationale) 1 (Paris 1939) pp. 201-202; G. MAZZATINTI, La Biblioteca dei Re d'Aragona in Napoli (Rocca S. Casciano 1897), p. 35.

Constant of Capri, Tractatus (Acta Sanctorum, Aug. 6, 534-537) Epitaphia imperatorum romanorum (A. RIESE, ed., Anthof. 5 logia Latina 1.2 (Leipzig 1906 ), 855d, 851, 834) ff. 6r-7r Anonymous, Sermons Andrew of St. Victor, Super Y saiam (RB 1312) ff. 9r-7rr Anonymous, H ebreorum fatuitates f. 71v This short passage is one of the arguments used in Jewish-Christian polemics. What follows is the full text: Guf corpus interpretatus et est locus in quo omnes anime fuerunt reposite ab initio mundi secundum heresim iudeorum et exinde sumuntur quando corporibus infunduntur; uncle in thalmut dicitur in pluribus locis quod messias non ueniet usquedum omnes anime que sunt in guf finiatur. ergo sequitur corelarie quod donec inter eos est mulier pregnans non ueniet messias. ff. 74r-135r Paul of Burgos, Scrutinium scripturarum (Sanctotis 1591) ff. 135v-14or Anonymous, Commentarioli in Ieremiam et Threnos The comments in this opusculum are drawn almost exclusively from Hebrew sources. When the comment gives a new Latin translation of the Hebrew, it is marked in the margin with 'l.h.' (littera hebraica). The author seems to have Andrew's commentary on Daniel in mind, for when he comes to Jeremiah 25 and the prediction of the seventy years of desolation, he simply notes: "Inchoatio 70 annorum captiuitatis babilonice querenda est in 9 capitulo danielis". Andrew's is the only commentary on Daniel known to the present editor that deals exhaustively with J eremiah's prediction of seventy years. ff. 142r-154v Andrew of St. Victor, Expositio super Danielem (RB 1315)

P gives only the first half of the text, breaking off in the middle of a comment on Dan. 7,6. The text goes to the very end of the folio.

THE MEANING OF THE MANUSCRIPTS

The random survival of the manuscripts described above does not perhaps provide the best data for understanding the place of Andrew's Expositio super Danielem in its medieval context, yet, apart from T which is the most silent witness to the Sitz

XIV

INTRODUCTION

im Leben of the text, the MSS suggest a number of pertinent considerations. First, the remaining three MSS come from times and places where there was considerable interchange between Christians and Jews. Bury St. Edmund's, the home of C, had been deeply in debt to the Jews of Norwich in the n7os; the first charge of ritual murder in England had been brought against them there in n81; and on Palm Sunday n90, 57 Jews were massacred in the town. There is a somewhat more positive side to Jewish-Christian relations at Bury: we owe the survival of one of the few Hebrew MSS of thirteenth century England, now Oxford, MS Laud. or. 17 4, to the monastic library there. Paris, where the bulk, if not all, of V was written, was the site of the first public disputation with the Jews in 1240, resulting in the burning of 24 cartloads of Hebrew books at what is now the Place de l'Hotel de Ville. Even so, there were probably at least rno Jewish families living in Paris throughout the second half of the thirteenth century. Finally, Naples, home for a time to P, was a great center for Jewish intellectual life at the end of the fifteenth century. Don Isaac Abrabanel, the great philosopher and exegete, had been fiscal advisor to Ferdinand I, and Joshua Solomon Soncino established his Hebrew printing press there in 1490. In the second place, the works found together with the Expositio super Danielem suggest that Andrew's work was brought to bear precisely on the question of Christological interpretation of Hebrew prophecy, i.e. Jewish-Christian polemics. It is worth noting that in all four MSS the commentary on Daniel is found together with Andrew's commentary on Isaiah, and that C and V also share the Bedan treatment of the 70 Weeks of years. In P Paul of Burgos' Scrutinium and the anonymous comments on Jeremiah bring into sharp focus the polemical intent of the codex. Oddly enough, the apocalyptic character of the book of Daniel did not seem to suggest itself to the apocalyptic imagination of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Andrew certainly had not treated it as such, nor have those who assembled the MSS containing Andrew's works thought to place it among apocalyptic writings. Rather the Apocalypse to John on Patmos, so heavily indebted for its imagery to the book of Daniel, seems to have preempted all other texts in the minds of those who so fervently yearned for the endtime. THE TRADITION OF THE TEXT

In each of the manuscripts under consideration, the text of the Expositio super Danielem has been written in a single hand. T is the best witness to the text, displaying only two homoeo-

INTRODUCTION

xv

teleuta, and characterized by several relatively insignificant inversions of two or three words. The Gothic hand is small and neat, using cedillas occasionally and ampersands never, thus suggesting a date of execution early in the thirteenth century. The text of C is somewhat less reliable than that of T. Yet an important characteristic of the text of C is the careful transmission of the biblical lemmata. They are rarely abbreviated, and give much better readings that the other MSS. Although these better readings almost never bear on the text of the commentary, they indicate that at some point in the tradition of the text the lemmata were corrected to conform more or less with what has become known as the Vulgata Clementina. Another distinguishing feature of the text of C is the spelling of proper names. C consistently reads nabugodonosor for nabuchodonosor (TPV), astrages for astiages, artarxerxes for artaxerxes. The hand resembles other English MSS that can be dated to the second quarter of the thirteenth century (7 ). The text of V is written in a very tight, smallish bookhand produced at Paris towards the end of the thirteenth century, probably about the time that John de Murro was teaching there. The obtrusive et siglum used at the ends of lines often with an expunction point underneath it confirms a date after 1270. The text in the MS is in a terrible state, often making no sense at all. There are numerous homoeoteleuta and a scattering of blank spaces that seem to indicate an illegible exemplar. Although the hand of P looks to be of the thirteenth century, it is necessarily from the fifteenth. It displays four times as many blank spaces over the first half of the text as does V over the entire text. P displays a number of other palaeographic idiosyncracies that shed some light on its exemplar. P reads z for r (erechiel for ezechiel, ioachar for ioachaz), and consistently misreads what must have been an abbreviation for enim in the exemplar as it, or else omits it altogether. Similarly P consistently misreads the abbreviation of a crossed l as t. This is most striking with respect to the abbreviation for babilonis which it gives as babit or habit. There is a similar confusion over principal is (principabit), tractabilis (tractabit), uidelicet (uidet), etc. Vel is also consistently misread as ut, and even illis is misread as est, ist, ut, and twice as itt. The pattern of these variants suggests that the crossed l of P's exemplar displayed a horizontal, rather than a diagonal, grace stroke, perhaps after the fashion of a late-twelfth century hand. The variants given in the apparatus criticus fall into three

(7) Compare London, British Library, MS Burney 3, dated to 1225-1252, photographs of which can be found in Facsimiles of Manuscripts and Inscriptions, E.A. BOND and E.M. THOMPSON, eds. (London 1873-1878), plates 73-74.

XVI

INTRODUCTION

main categories. The first and largest single category is T: CPV, as in the following examples: Pr., 50 I, rr9 I, 265 II, So II, rr7 II, 243 Ill, 122 III, 190 IV, 126 VI, 77

seruis] om. elegantia] elegantie est] om. .xiii.] .xiiii. minus] omnes quesiuit] que sunt Si] Set unde] unum predictum erat] predixerat sunt] sint; socios add. uelut lemma

Following VII, IOI where P ends, this category is represented by T: CV, as indicated below: VII, 145 VII, 360 VIII, 23 VIII, 57 VIII, 73 IX, 202 IX, 638 IX, 851 X, 38 X, 141

eorum] cornu querere] querente re Nostris] Respondens minus] nimis isse] ille occiditur] occidit .lx.] .lxx. assi] animus retinebant illius] uidebant eius uobis] iustis

These variants establish two families of manuscripts, one represented by T and the other by the common reading of CPV. This second family can be distinguished further into two sub-families, one represented by C, the other represented by the common reading of PV. The latter is given in the category of variants TC: PV, as in the following: Pr., 38 II, 6 II, 201 II, 222 II, 239 Ill, 221 VI, 33 VI, 77 VII, 14

de eo] deo annus] annis collato] collocato euum] eum inuenit?] inuenitur deum] Ysaac add. uelut lemma exeat] iudicium add. uelut lemma carnibus] canibus idest] idem

Beyond VII, IOI it is impossible to distinguish the unique variants of V from those it might have shared with P, had the text of P been complete. The third category is represented by C: TPV, and reflects for the most part the better readings of biblical lemmata mentioned above, as in the following:

INTRODUCTION II, 271 II, 376 III, 227 IV, 150 VI, 90 VII, 89 VII, 105 VII, 286 VIII, 206 IX, 447

sum] om. principem] om. gentibus] om. eius] om. Porro] et uel set add. aspiciebam] aspicit regnum] regum quoniam] quod dies] om. obprobrium] obprobrio

Two other categories of variants disrupt the otherwise neat relationship between the witnesses. The first of these is TV: CP, as in: I, 28 II, 227 III, 30 VI, 8

ioachaz] et add. ignorantia] ignominia nullus] ullus actionis] accusationis

The second, TP: CV: II, 215 III, 107 III, 143 III, 222 IV, 79 VII, 64

fit] sit Tune] Tu ne curam uir] curauit disperiret] disperdet ros] res aliquanto] aliquando

These last two categories comprise more than one or two random occurrences and cannot be easily accounted for, given the rather straightforward relationships generated by the previous categories. Although one might resort to the notion of "contamination" to help explain their presence, such an explanation could produce an infinity of hypothesized intermediaries, and would become more an exercise in imagination rather than scholarship, not helping particularly to clarify the stemma codicum of the MSS. In the end, the simplest way to describe these relationships is according to the following diagram:

a T

""

/ //3~ C

/\

p

XVIII

INTRODUCTION THE PRESENT EDITION

The title expositio comes not from the manuscripts of the super Danielem, but rather from Andrew's tendency to describe his works as such (8 ), as well as manuscripts of his other works, such as Cambridge, Corpus Christi College, MS 30, that do bear the title Expositio. The orthography of the present edition generally follows the manuscripts. The spelling of proper names has been somewhat regularized. For the sake of convenience the edition is divided according to.- the modern divisions of biblical chapter and verse. Rubrics have been provided to give some sense of Andrew's division, which accords with the traditional bipartite division of stories (chh. 1-6) and visions (chh. 7-12). The text of the Expositio super Danielem is accompanied by a number of apparatus. The apparatus criticus has been described above. The apparatus biblicus attempts to give some idea of the state of the biblical text used by Andrew. The fascicle edition of the Vulgate currently being published would give a clear picture of the biblical text, but it has yet to arrive at the book of Daniel. Hence the most accessible edition to give some sense of the textual variants in the book of Daniel is the 1983 edition of the Vulgate prepared by Bonifatius Fischer et al. Since the variants given there are far from exhaustive, and do not necessarily present the variants of the Paris text for the book of Daniel (the version that might have been most important for this edition), all variants in the Vulgate text have simply been identified by: Vulg. *. The apparatus fontium gives references to standard printed editions, but it also includes references to the Glossae Gisleberti found in St. Omer, Bibl. mun., MS 220, ff. 1-29. This Gloss on Daniel appears to antedate Andrew's work, and stands near the point of origin for the text which became the Glossa Ordinaria on Daniel (9 ). This text has been given the siglum GG. Given that the full impact of Andrew's work will not be known until the myriad of biblical commentaries of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries have been edited, another apparatus has been provided for the present edition which gives references primarily to thirteenth century works that cite Andrew. These are not properly testimonia, and there is no commonly used

(8) See B. SMALLEY, SBMA, p. 120. (9) See B. SMALLEY, "Gilbertus Universalis, Bishop of London (n28-1134) and the Problem of the Glossa Ordinaria", Recherches de thiologie ancienne et medievale 7 (1935), 235-262.

INTRODUCTION

XIX

term to describe such an apparatus. It could perhaps be called an apparatus debitorum; in any case, the references contained in it are indexed together with those of the apparatus fontium in the index auctorum.

ABBREVIATIONS Bereshith Rabba (Genesis) CCCM CCSL GCS

eds. Theodor & Albeck (Berlin, 1931); tr. (English) Freedman (London 1939)

Corpus Christianorum Continuatio Mediaevalis Corpus Christianorum Series Latina Griechischen Christlichen Schriftsteller der ersten Jahrhunderte GG Glossae Gisleberti, St. Omer, Bibl. mun., MS 220, ff. 1-29 H S, Dn H istoria Scholastica: Liber Daniel is, PL 198 HS, IV Rg Historia Scholastica: Liber IV Regum, PL 198 Hieron., Hieronymus, Commentariorum in Danielem libri III [IV}, In Dan. ed. F. GLORIE, CCSL 75A (Turnhout 1964) Jerahmeel, Jerahmeel, Chronicle, ed. & tr. M. GASTER (rpt New York Chronicle 1971) Josephus, A] Flavius Josephus, Antiquitates Judaeorum Megillah Talmud Babli, Seder Mo'ed, Tractate Megillah (Israel 1976); tr. (English) M. SIMON (London 1938) Mikra'oth Great Rabbinic Bible (Israel 1974) gedoloth PL Patrologiae Cursus Completus Latinae RB F. STEGMULLER, Repertorium Biblicum Medii Aeui (Madrid 1950-1980) Rashi Rabbi Solomon ben Isaac, in Mikra'oth gedoloth Seder Olam in Medieval Jewish Chronicles II, ed. A. NEUBAUER (Oxford 1895) Smalley Beryl SMALLEY, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages (Oxford 19843 ) Vayyikra eds. A.A. HALEVI & Y. ToPOROVSKY (Israel 1963); tr. Rabba (English) J. ISRAELSTAM (London 1939) (Leuiticus) Vulg. Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, ed. B. Fischer et al. (Stuttgart 1983) Vulg.* variants given in the apparatus of Vulg.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary ABRAHAM IBN EZRA, In Mikra'oth gedoloth, Israel 1974ANDREW OF ST. VICTOR, De historica Andreae victorini expositione in Ecclesiasten, Ed. G. Calandra, Palermo 1948. IDEM, Expositio in Ezechielem, Ed. M Signer, CCCM sub prelo. IDEM, "Andrea di S. Vittore: il suo commenta a Giona", Ed. A. Penna. Biblica 36 (1955), 305-331. IDEM, Expositio super H eptateuchum, Eds. Ch. Lohr and R. Berndt, CCCM 53, Turnhout 1986. Biblia Sacra Iuxta Vulgatam Versionem, Ed. B. Fischer et al., Stuttgart 1983. Biblia H ebraica, Eds. R. Kittel et al., Stuttgart 1968. EusEBIUS-JEROME, Chronicon, Ed. R. Helm, GCS: Eusebius 7, Berlin 1956. HUGH OF ST. CHER, Postilla super Danielem, In Opera omnia 5, Venice 1732. JERAHMEEL, Chronicle, Tr. & ed. M. Gaster, Prologue H. Schwarzbaum, New York 1971. JEROME, Commentariorum in Danielem libri III [IV], Ed. F. Glorie, CCSL 75A, Turnhout 1964J oHN DE MuRRO, Expositio in Danielem Prophetam, In S. Thomae Aquinatis Opera Omnia 31, Paris 1876. JOSEPHUS, Antiquitates J udaeorum, Oxford 1720. IDEM, The Latin Josephus, I, Ed. F. Blatt, Acta Jutlandica 30, 1, Arhus 1958. Midrash Rabba, Eds. A.A. Halevi & I. Toporovsky, Israel 1963; (English) Gen. eds. H. Freedman & M. Simon, London 1939. PETER CoMESTOR, Historia Scholastica, PL 198, Paris 1855. Seder Olam, In Medieval Jewish Chronicles II, Ed. A. Neubauer, Oxford 1895. SOLOMON BEN ISSAC OF TROVES (Rashi), In Mikra'oth gedoloth, Israel 1974Talmud Babli, Israel 1976; (English) The Babylonian Talmud, Ed. I. Epstein, London 1935-1952. Secondary HAILPERIN, Herman. Rashi and the Christian Scholars, Pittsburgh 1963. LuBAC, Henri DE, Exegese midievale: les quatre sens de l'Ecriture, Aubier 1959. SALTMAN, A., "Pseudo-] erome in the Commentary of Andrew of St. Victor on Samuel", Harvard Theological Review 67 (1974), 195-253. SMALLEY, B., "Andrew of St. Victor, Abbot of Wigmore: A TwelfthCentury Christian Hebraist", Recherches de theologie ancienne et mediivale ro (1938), 358-373. EADEM, "Gilbertus Universalis, Bishop of London (n28-II34) and the

XXII

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Problem of the Glossa Ordinaria", Recherches de theologie ancienne et medievale 7 (1935), 235-262. EADEM, "The School of Andrew of St. Victor", Recherches de theologie ancienne et medievale II (1939), 145-167. EADEM, The Study of the Bible in the Middle Ages, Oxford 19843 • SPICQ. C., Esquisse d'une histoire de l'exegese latine au moyen age, Bibliotheque Thomiste 26, Paris 1944. TALMAGE, F., Disputation and Dialogue: Readings in the Jewish-Christian Encounter, New York 1975. WILLIAMS, AL., Adversus Judaeos, Cambridge 1935.

EXPOSITIO SVPER DANIELEM

EXPOSITIO SVPER DANIELEM ANDREAS SVPER DANIELEMa

a

= Codex

C, f.

IIIrb;

Codex V, f.

r87ra

SIGLA T C V p

Stuttgart, Wiirttembergische Landesbibliothek, MS HB IV.6 Cambridge, Pembroke College, MS 45 Vatican City, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, MS Vat. lat. ro53 Paris, Bibliotheque nationale, MS lat. 574

(PRAEFATIO)

5

ro

r5

20

25

30

T r54ra

Ad commendationem sequentis operis non nichil afferre uidetur c m t6 noticia uite commendabilis actoris. Danielem huius operis acto- V rs 7ra rem de alto sanguine regum iuda originem duxisse, ut suis in locis P r 42r demonstrabimus, scripture huius sequentia patenter edocebunt. Quante sanctitatis et puritatis, quante in omni morum honestate perfectionis fuerit quod hostilis inuidia omni uigilantia perscrutans, nichil quod ei obicere posset se posse reperire, licet inuita, confessa est, excepto dei sui cultu - euidens argumentum est. Quantus in ligatorum solutione, quantus in profundorum et arcanorum reuelatione, quam deuotus erga domini cultum exstiterit, et ipsius babylonici I regis et uerba et facta, qui eum C mva sanctorum spiritum deorum habere dixit et in faciem cadens tanquam deum adorauit et hostias et incensum ut ei sacrificarentur afferri precepit, et uiri desideriorum et filii hominis appellatio manifestissime declarant. Admirabilis sapientie illius propheta qui ait: Nunquid tu daniele sapientior es? testis est fidelissimus. De prudentia uero illius, si dubitas, ad conuictos ex ore suo falsum dixisse testimonium sacerdotes et deprehensam sacerdotum belis fraudem et fallaciam et draconem offa tenaci suffocatum, oculos uerte. In hiis omnibus et multis aliis que breuitatis studio preterimus si diligenter attenderis, prudentiam eius uehementer admiraberis - parum dixi: obstupesces. Hee et multa alia quibus preclare ornatus fuit uirtutum et gratiarum bona, diuina semper preeunte gratia, in terra captiuitatis et peregrinationis sue opes, facultates, pecunias, possessiones, purpuram, torquem, regum amicicias, summos honores, magne dignitatis gradus et inmortalem gloriam, postremo honorificentiam et securitatem illi pepererunt. In babylone nabuchodonosor, exposito admirabili illius sompno, in sublime eum extulit multis honoratum muneribus, super omnes prouincias babylonis constituit et cunctis illius sapientibus prefecit; tres pueros, sidrach, misach et abdenago, illius socios, eius rogatu et gratia promouit ultra fores atrii regalis; eum familiariter et honorifice habuit. 17 Ez. 28,3

370

18/21 cf. Dan. r3 et r4

29/34 cf. Dan.

3/5 infra, cap. I.98/ 99 5/9 infra, cap. VI.r9/ 24 15 infra, cap. VIII.r50; cap. IX. 5r7

2

12/15 infra, cap. II. 367 /

7/8 perscrutans] perfruitans .P, quid C incertum (perfinitans ?) 12 eum] eorum C, enim V 13 dixit] spat. P 18 conuictos] CO"- ex conuinctos C, conuinctos P 20 offa] ossa V, quid C incertum suffocatum] substratum C 21/22 que ... preterimus] omnes, om. Smalley 23 dixi] spat. P 34 ultra] intra T, quid P incertum

6 35

40

45

50

55

60

65

PRAEFATIO

Exposita quam in pariete artieulus manus exarauit seriptura, iussit balthassar ut daniel purpura indueretur, et eollum eius aureo torque eireumdaretur, et quod haberet potestatem tereius in regno suo de eo prediearetur. Dario uero qui balthasar oeeidit usque adeo earus fuit ut primo illum unum de tribus prineipibus qui ex .x. prineipibus preerant eonstitueret, et deinde super omne regnum constituere cogitaret, et I usque ad oeeasum solis ne in C mvb laeum mitteretur laboraret, et eo in laeum misso ineenatus dormiret, et laeui appropinquans, fugata quam in sompnum traxit noctis umbra, danielem uoee flebili inclamaret dieens: Daniel, et eetera. Quantum post eyri regis persarum qui cum dario I auuneulo suo babylonem destruxit annum tereium uixerit, ex V r87rb canonicis, si rite recordor, seripturis nulla eertitudo potest haberi. Quod uero eatenus uixerit ipso docente liquido monstratur. Materia eius in hoe opere sunt reges de quibus agit, et eorum actus, uisiones et sompnia, benefieia dei sibi et seruis suis impensa, et obstupescenda eius mirabilia propter ipsorum liberationem exhibita. Intentio uero eius est admirabilem dei potentiam que quos uult exaltat et quos uult humiliat predieare, et eordibus omnium qui hane seripturam et lecturi erant et audituri, ut earn in frequenti memoria habeant inprimere. Hoe I fine istud intendit ut eognita P r 42v quam prediximus potentia solus ab omnibus colatur deus, et timeatur solus rex regum et dominus dominantium sieuti est credatur et habeatur. De hae quam prefati sumus materia hoe modo agit: primum hystorias I et que ad illas spectant ordine persequitur. Deinde de T r 54 r 6 uisionibus suis et reuelationibus sibi faetis eo quo uise et sibi facte sunt ordine tractat, quid sub quo rege faetum uel uisum sit demonstrans. Danielem hebrei non inter prophetas set agiographos numerant.

35/38 cf. Dan. 5

38/ 45 cf. Dan. 6

45/46 cf. Dan. ro,r

53/54 cf.

Dan. 5,19

65 cf. Hieron., Praefatio in danielem prophetam, PL 28.r360B; cf. GG r, bva

36/37 et collum ... circumdaretur] om. V 38 de eo] deo PV 46 uixerit] spat. P 47 si rite] finite V, spat. P recorder] recordar T certitude] quid C, incertum 48 eaten us] cathenis C 50 seruis] om. C P V 52 exhibita] om. T 56 fine] siue C 61 persequitur] prosequitur C de] in add. CPV 62 uise] in se C

(PARS PRIMA: DE HISTORIIS DANIELIS ET SOCIORVM EIVS) (DANIEL ET SOCII EIVS IN BABYLONE: CAPITVLVM PRIMVM) 5

ro

r5

20

I, r. Anno tercio regni ioachim regis iude uenit nabuchodonosor rex babylonis ierusalem et obsedit eam. In primis unde factum sit ut et ipse daniel et tres pueri in babylonem uenerint, etsi non manifeste demonstrent, nonnulla tamen ex parte hiis uerbis insinuat. In eo enim quod ait nabuchodonosor regem babylonis ierusalem uenisse et obsedisse, dominumque in I manus eius ioachim regem iude et partem uasorum domus dei tradidisse, innuere uidetur quod una cum uasis ipsum et socios eius in terram sennaar rex babylonis asportauerit. Neque enim aliam facile conuenientem causam inuenies quare huius obsidionis ierusalem et traditionis ioachim et uasorum asportationis recoluerit. Vnde postquam de uasis quid rex fecerit ostendit, statim quid de se aliisque pueris fieri iusserit adiungit. Tempus itaque quando in babylonem uenerint, et unde factum sit ut illuc uenirent designat cum ait: Anno tercio regni ioachim, etcetera.

C

u2ra

(QVAESTIO DE ANNO TERTIO IOACHIM)

Queritur quomodo uerum sit quod in tercio anno regni ioachim filii iosie regis iude nabuchodonosor rex babylonis ierusalem uenerit et earn obsederit, cum ieremias propheta dicat, quartum annum regni ioachim filii iosie esse primum annum regni nabucho25 donosor regis babylonis. Que questio hoe modo solui potest ut dicatur daniel eos solos regni ioachim annos quos totos et integros sine fratre in regno habuit dixisse, ieremias uero etiam illum, in cuius parte frater eius ioachaz a populo terre rex constitutus quern nechao rex egypti uinctum secum asportauit regnasse 30 perhibetur, annis regni ioachim annumerasse. Vel forsitan I eum V r87va annum quo obsessus nee regni administrationem exercere nee regio more se habere potuit, in annis regni eius numerari daniel

5/6 Dan. r,r

19 Dan. r,r

23/25 cf. Ier. 25,r

9/13 cf. Euseb.-Hieron., Cbronicon r72F, R. Helm, ed., GCS: Eusebius 7.98a

5 iude] omnes, iuda Vu