Vivarium - Vol Xlii, No 1, 2004

8/9/2019 Vivarium - Vol Xlii, No 1, 2004

1/155

/';-=09 )(8* =-0/']


2/155

VIVARIUM

AN INTERNATIONALJOURNALFOR THE PHILOSOPHYAND INTELLECTUALLIFE OF THE MIDDLE AGES ANDRENAISSANCEvivariums devotednparticularo he rofaneide f mediaevalhilosophyand he ntellectualife f he Middle gesndRenaissance.

EDITORS L.M. deRijk, Leiden)H.A.G.Braakhuis,Nijmegen)C.H.Kneepkens,(Groningen)W.J. ourtenay, Madison)E.P. Bos, Leiden)D. Perler,(Basel)M.G.M. ander oel,Nijmegen).Secretaryf he ditorial oard: rof. .H. Kneepkens.All ommunications,xcepthose f business ature,houldeaddressedtoC.H.Kneepkens,ijksuniversiteitroningen,aculteiter etteren,akgroepMediaevistiek,.O. Box716, 700ASGroningen,heNetherlands.ADVISORY Tullioregory,Rome)Albert immermann,Cologne)-J.E. urdoch,

COMMITTEE(Cambridge,A).PUBLISHERSBrill, eiden,heNetherlands.PUBLISHED Twiceearly.SUBSCRIPTION olumeLII2004)320 p.): UR 138USD172)ornstitutions,nd UR

67 USD83)for rivateubscribers,nclusivef ostagend acking.ricencludesonlineubscription.Subscriptionrders re acceptedor ompleteolumesnly, rders akingeffect ith he irstssue f ny ear. rders ay lso e entered n n uto-matic

ontinuingasis. ancellationsill nly eacceptedf heyre eceived

before ctober st f he ear recedinghe earnwhichhe ancellationisto ake ffect. laimsormissingssues ill e met, ree f harge,fmadewithinhree onths fdispatchor uropeanustomersnd ivemonthsorcustomersutsideurope.Subscriptionrdershoulde sent o:

Brill cademicublishersStrattonusinessark, egasusrive, iggleswadeBedfordshireGI 8QB,United ingdomTel.: 44(0)176704954;ax: 44(0)176701604E-Mail:[email protected]

Allprices ndpostage handlinghargesreexclusivefVAT n EU-countries(VATnot pplicableutsideheEU).

Now njoy ree nline ccess to this ournalwith our rint ubscription.isit he Brill- ebsiteat http:/www.brill.nl ndenter he nlineournalsection.

BRILLLEIDENBOSTON

ISSN0042-7543Printersion; ISSN1568-5349Onlineersion)Printedn The Netherlands Printed n acid-freeaper


3/155

Introduction

WILLIAM.GOURTENAY

One might hink hat fter ecades of ntensive esearch n Jean Buridan

there would not be room for nother volume of essays.The fact remains,however, s Jack Zupko recently bserved, Buridan left an enormousnumber of writings, most of which have never been edited, et aloneproperly tudied. Although nterest n Buridan has increased t least ten-fold since the 1970s,many of the finer points of his thought, is exactpositions n a variety f particular opics and locad debates, are still notwell known. 1 The contributions n this special issue of Vivariumeek toimprove he understanding f Buridan specifically n those ocal debatesat the University f Paris in the second quarter of the fourteenth en-tury y ooking oth at the university ontext n which Buridan was teach-ing, debating, nd writing s well as specific ebates on issues of crucialimportance n the faculty f arts at that time.

The first ssay explores he university ontext t Paris and brings ntothe discussion number of recent discoveries bout the institutional ndsocial structure f the faculty f arts that modify he understanding fBuridan's role as teacher and disputant. Among these are the master-pupil relationship, specially s it concerns the teaching careers n thefaculty f arts. Along the way some new information s provided n thosewith whom Buridan debated in the 1330s and 1340s. Hans Thijssenexpands on one of those themes, namely the extent o which there wasa Buridan school, by exploring he relation of Buridan and Albert ofSaxonyon two ssues: he understanding f quantity nd projectilemotion.From several different tandpoints, nstitutional, eographical, nd intel-lectual, Thijssen rejects he notion of a Buridan school in the fourteenthcentury.

The next two essaystreat pecific ssues n Buridan's thought, lacingthem n the context f

contemporarynd earlier

pproaches.Jack

ZupkoaddressesBuridan's views on the nature and immortality f the human

1J. Zupko, ohn uridanNotre ame, N 2003, iv.

Koninklijkerill V,Leiden,004 Vwarium2,1Also vailablenline www.brill.nl


4/155

2 WILLIAM. GOURTENAY

intellect, disputingOlaf Pluta' recent assertion that Buridan favored

Alexander of Aphrodisias' denial of the immortality f the intellect nthe grounds of its material nature.2 Similarly, tefano Caroti looks atBuridan's treatment f the problem of intension nd remission f formsin his final commentary n the Physics deultima ectura, comparing t tothe approaches of Walter Burley, Nicole Oresme, Albert of Saxony, andJohannes Marcilius of Inghen.

The last two essaysexamine debates that engaged Buridan at an ear-lier point n his career. Jean Celeyrette ooks at Buridan's treatise n the

point, which he developed in debate with Michael de Montecalerio.Celeyrette ollows he development f Buridan's thinking n this topicfrom hat earlier reatise hrough he two last versions f Buridan's com-mentary n Aristotle's hysics. inally, Dirk-Jan ekker concludes he vol-ume with an introduction nd edition of Buridan's treatise n relationentitled e dependentiis,iversitatibust convenientiis.he treatise lso providesa view of the arguments f two of Buridan's contemporaries ith whomhe debated, a Picard master nd one from he English-German ation.

Beyond furthering he debate on Buridan's relation o Ockham or the

existence f a Buridan school, these essaysprovide mportant ew infor-mation that may help uncover more on the identities nd viewpoints fBuridan's mmediate ontemporaries t Paris. And that, n turn, houldlead toward better understanding f Buridan n the academic world nwhich he lived.

University f WisconsinDepartmentf Histoiy

2O. Pluta, ersecutionnd he rt fWriting.he arisiantatutefApril , 1272, nd tsPhilosophicalonsequencesin:P.J.J.M. akkered.), heminse apensedivale.tudesffertes Z^nonaluzaTurnhout 002, 63-85.


5/155

TheUniversityf Pans at the TimeofJean Buridan ndNicoleOresme

WILLIAM.COURTENAY

Thepurpose

of the followingemarkss to exploremoredeeplythe nsti-tutional ontext n which Buridan and Oresmepursuedtheir academiccareers,namelythe thirty-five ear period betweenthe beginningofBuridan'steachingcareer at Paris (c. 1325)and the date of his death(c. 1360),whichprecededby onlya fewyearsOresme's move from aristo Rouen to assumehis duties s dean of the cathedral 1364).Muchhasbeen written bout both men as well as the University f Paris at thistime,but a more precise and updated)understandingf the structure,operation,and resources of the university t that time has not been

brought o bear on the relationship f their careers and of others sso-ciated withthem.

Institutionaltructurend ts MeaningorCommunicationndDiscipleshipThe medievalUniversityf Paris was a corporation omposedof largelyautonomousgroups.This appliesnot onlyto its division nto four sepa-rate faculties f arts, heology,anonlaw, and medicine,but wastrue ofthe four nationsof the faculty f arts. Collegesof secular students s well

as the convents hat served s houses of study orvariousreligiousrdersoperatedfor the most part ndependently. olleges came under the uris-dictionof the university, aculties,r nations only nsofar s the mastersand studentswho held burses n them also belongedto nations nd fac-ulties.Conventswere evenmore autonomous nd came under the uris-dictionof the universitynly nsofar s their tudent members oughtuniversity egreeor their regentmasterparticipatedn the meetings ndacademic exercisesf the faculty f theology.

At the same time the boundaries hat separatedthese different roupswereporousand allowed acertaindegreeof contact nd communication.This was notsimply ecause the schools f the nationsn the rue du Fouarreand the convents nd colleges hroughouthe LatinQuarter opographicallyexisted ideby side. Studentsn the faculty f artshad the right o attend

Koninklijkerill V,Leiden,004 Vivarium2,1Also vailablenline www.brill.nl


6/155

4 WILLIAM.GOURTENAY

lectures f masters utside heir nation,1speciallywhenduring particularterm or year no master n their own nation offered ectures on someauthoritativeextneeded tofulfillurricular equirementsefore roceedingto examinationnd determination.2isputationsytheir erynature roughtmembers of these various groupstogether oth as participants nd asaudience.Accessprivilegesolibraries,ven the ibraries f religiousrders,could be extendedto favored ndividuals,lthoughborrowing rivilegeswereusuallyrestricted o their wn members.Thus,althoughmuch ofastudent's cademiclifewould bespentwithin heconfines f the group o

whichhe owed hisallegiance,t would have beenalmostmpossibleorhimnot to be exposedto the ideas andviewpointsf those n othergroups.Both the self-containmentnd the interaction f the groupsthat com-

prisedthe universityre important n order to understandssues of con-tact, ntellectualnfluence,nd discipleshipr schools f thought.nasmuchas Buridanbelongedothefaculty f arts, s did Oresmebefore ecominga master f theology y 1342,albeit n two different ations,we need tolook at howthe nstitutionaltructure f that facultyffected heir cademiccareers and theirpotentialrelationship.

In lieu of a matriculationist, which neither he university or thenations t Paris maintainedn the fourteenth entury, ncoming tudentsin arts nrolled ymutual greement ith masterwho wouldsubsequentlybe responsibleoroverseeingheir tudies.The master o chosen had tobelongto the nationwithwhich he studentwould be affiliatedn thebasisof geographicalorigin.3 or purposesof enrollment nd affiliation,he

1See the tatutef 1290n Chartulariumniversitatisarisiensishenceforthited s

CUP),d. H. Denifle nd.Chtelain,vols., aris1889-1897,I, 46-7,#570.2Althougho list f ecture oursesttendedya studentn the rts acultyur-vives romhis eriod or aris, n examplerom heUniversityf Vienna n thelatefourteenthentury,ited yDeniflenAuctariumhartulariiniversitatisarisiensis(henceforthited s AUP, ed. H. Deniflend E. Chtelain,ol. , Paris 894, xix-XXX,hows student hotook oursesnder hirteenifferent astersn thefac-ulty f rts,most f hem romheAustrianation,ut t east ive romheRhenish,Hungarian,nd Saxonnations. he structurendpracticesf Viennawerebasedon theParisianmodel.3In most asestheboundariesf the nations oincidedith he boundariesfgroupsf dioceses.he French ationomprisedll thediocesesn the cclesiasti-calprovincesf Sens,Tours, ourges,esanon,ndLyon,s well s thedioceses

ofReims,oissons,hlons-sur-Marne,etz,Verdun, oul, nd tudentsnthe rtsfacultyromtaly, pain, ndPortugal.arts f thediocesesf Lige,Trier, ndRouentheFrench exin)were lso ncludedn theFrench ation. he Normannationorrespondedo thedioceses ftheprovincefRouen,with he xceptionftheFrench exin. hePicard ationncludedhose romhedioceses fBeauvais,Noyon,nd Laon on the outherndgeofPicardy,ndall dioceses orthnd east


7/155

THE UNIVERSITYFPARISAT THE TIMEOFJEANURIDAN 5

specificownor village, nd in some cases even the bank of the river nwhich t waslocated,woulddetermine henationto whichonebelonged.4In all probability hemaster electedhad to be a regentmaster, hat sone actively ecturing t the time, ust as the master under whom oneeventuallyetermined, as licensed, r inceptedhad to be regent nless,in specialcircumstances,ne obtained dispensationo be promoted ndera non-regent aster.5 nce having nrolledwith master, ne waslegallya student n the nation,faculty, nd university.

The supervisingmaster hosenby the student ot only belongedto his

nation; n most cases hewas chosennitially rom hosewho came fromthe samecountry r region s the student.6 he choice might e based ona recommendationrom omeonein the home regionor through hoseat Paris a studentmightknow fromhome or through network. r thechoicemight imply esultfrom vailable residentialpacein the houseor rented roomsof a master.7Given these imitations n choice foranincoming tudent, t is unlikely hat the choice wouldhave been basedon the scholarly eputationf the master, nd even less on his ntellectualoutlook.At the same time, hared accommodationswitha master crossa periodofyears nevitably eant hat heywould come toknow ach otherwell, nd that upervising asterswho alsoserved s house-mastersouldhave closeoversight f the academic and personaldevelopmentf theirstudents.

(Throuanne,ournai,ambrai,ige) pto the eft ank f heMeuse/Maasthusincludingportionf Hollandnda small ortionf the diocesef Utrecht).

4Abitter truggleruptedn 1358betweenheEnglishnd Picard ationsvertheproperffiliationf a student ho camefrom he boundaryegionf the wonations. fter onsiderableegotiation,preciseoundaryasdrawn p,markingtheriversnd townshatay long he greed-uponorderAUP, 233-6;CUPII,56-9,#1240).5In 1370Henry fLangensteinetitionedo be allowed o overseehedetermi-nation f two tudents,espitehefact hathe was not ctivelyegent uring hatyearAUP, 375).Onregency,eeAUP, xxxii; h.Thurot, el'organisatione 'en-seignementans'universite PasauMoyen-AgeParis-Besanon850,91;MadelaineToulouse,aNationnglaise-Allemandee 'UniversitePansdes rigineslafin uXVesicleParis 939, 08-9;MineoTanaka,a nationnglo-allemandee 'UniversiteParis la fin uMoyenge,aris1990,150-3.

6Mostupervisingasterst the ime f determination,hichmarkedhe ran-sition rom uditor o bachelor,ere rom hecountryr regionf the andidate,ascan be seennthe ecordsf heEnglishation;eeTanaka1990op. it., bove,n. 5),169-70.7W.J. ourtenay,arisiancholarsn the arly ourteenthenturyCambridge999,81-91.


8/155

6 WILLIAM.COURTENAY

Astudentmight

need tochange

hissupervising

masterduring

hiscourse of studiesbecause thelatter was for a time not in residenceoractively eaching,or for other reasons.8Such changeswere withinthegroupof regentmasters n the nation to which the student elonged,apattern hat can be seen in the Proctor'sRegister f the Englishnationfor he fourteenth entury nd in thosefor he French nd Picard nationsin the fifteenth entury.9 hangesoccurred requentlyt the degreestage,probablyoften s a resultof interruptionsn the pattern of regency fmasters.n the courseof theseshifts, tudents oughtout long-termmas-

ters whose control of the spaceresourcesof the nation,whosepowerwithin he university, nd whose influencen their home regionwouldhelptheir areers. Usuallytwo or three masterswereresponsibleorhalfto two-thirds f those determining,eing icensed, r incepting. nd whensenior masters cceptednew applicantsfor tutelageor sponsorship,vi-dencesuggestshat financial onsiderations layedan important art.10

Cases ofsupervising asters rom utside he nation of the student ereextremelyareandrequired specialdispensationrom he nation.11lmostalltheseexceptionswere occasionedby the quotalimitations or icensing,whichobligednations that had reached their annual limit to seek anavailableopening n the quota of another nation.12 uch arrangementswere administrativend temporary, ot instructional. he outside mas-ter sponsoringhecandidatewould have to be sufficientlynformed boutthe latter's cademic and moralqualifications,ut no direct upervisionwasrequired.

8Tanakahas tracedn detail hefrequencyfchangesnsupervisingasterst

timesfpromotion;eeTanaka1990op.it.,bove, .5),141-85. caseof changein the upervisingaster f a studentn theFrench ationn 1329-1330hatmayhavebeenbasedon more ersonaleasonss describedn Gourtenay999op. it.,above,n. 7),49-56.Thestudent, ho camefrom he diocese f Meaux nd thusbelongedo the Parisian rovincef the French ation, as, n 1329,under hesupervisionf regent asterromhediocese fTroyes, hich ellwithinhe ensprovincef the nation.n 1330the tudent hangedoa supervisingaster romhisowndiocese.9See AUPfor he egisterf heEnglishationnthe ourteenthentury;UPvol. V, ed. C. Samaran nd E.A. VanMo,for he Picard ation rom he atefifteenthentury;nd AUP vol.V, ed. C. Samarannd E.A. VanMo,for heFrench ationn themiddle fthefifteenthentury.10

Tanaka1990op.it., bove, .5),171.Whetherealthytudentsoughtuper-vision romenioregent asters,r seniormastersreferredoaccept high er-centagefwealthytudents,heresult as the ame.11 ee the discussionf the case of Johannes icolaind masterMichaeldeMontecalerioelow.12Tanaka 1990op. it., bove, . 5),153-4,68.


9/155

THEUNIVERSITYFPARISATTHE TIMEOFJEANURIDAN 7

In normal ircumstances,ow muchdirection id the

supervisingaster

give,and of what kind? n the case of a masterwho tookoversponsor-shipat the time of licensing r inception, he relationship as probablysolely dministrativend financial.f the same master upervisedhe stu-dent fromhis timeas auditorthrough o inception, herelationship asobviouslyongerand morepersonal,but not necessarilynstructionalrideological.

How often student's upervisingmasterwas alsohis teacheror tutoris not known.Evenif the student hose or felt bligedto attend he lec-

tures of his master,one need not, and probablycouldnot, fulfill herequirementsf the arts curriculum y attending nly ecturesgivenbyone's master.The nation did expectand certainly referred hat studentswouldtake their nstructional raining romamongthe lecture coursesprovidedby the masters n the nation. n 1290, however,hefaculty fartsprohibited ations rommaintaining closedshop,and students erefree to attend ecturesoffered y mastersoutsidetheir nation.13 hus,while tudents ould hear ectures nd, obviously, isputationsf anymas-ter in the faculty f arts, nstructionalupervisionnd promotion,withveryfewexceptions,had to be from amongthe regentmastersof thenation. Close extendedcontactbetween a student nd a masteronlyoccurredwithin he nationand probably ookthe form f advising atherthan intellectual ormation. he latter,where it occurred,wasprobablya private, evelopmentalxperiencebased onattendance t various ec-tures nd disputations,nd on extensive eadingof texts, ommentaries,determinations,nd treatises.

What does this nalysismean forthe relation f Buridan andOresme,or of Albert of Saxonyor Marsilius ofInghenwith either? And whatimplicationsoesit have for he existence nd meaning f a Buridanchoolat Paris?Firstof all, the procedures utlined bove meanthat althoughNicoleOresmemight have attended ecturesby Jean Buridan,wouldprobablyhaveheardhimdispute, nd certainly ad accessto his writtenwork,Buridanwould nothave been thesupervisingmasterunder whomhe studied.One or moremastersn the Norman nationfulfilledhatrole.The sameprincipleholds true for Albert Ricmestorp f Saxony,whosesupervisingmaster t the time of determination,icensing,nd inceptionwas Albertof

Prague,a

prominentmaster n the

Englishnation but not

one from the same home regionas Ricmestorp.14arsilius of Inghen

13CUPI, 46.14AUP, 149,150,152.


10/155

8 WILLIAM.GOURTENAY

inceptedunderWilhelmBuser,bothof whom were n the

Englishnation

and came from he sameregion f Holland.15imilarly, enry Heimbuchof Langensteindetermined, as licensed, nd inceptedunder HermannConsul ofSaxony, againboth in the Englishnation and both fromGermany.16one of these was a pupilor discipleof the famousprede-cessorwithwhom theirnames are often inked n the literature. resmewas not a discipleof Buridanor studiedunderhim in any officialway,nor did Albert of Saxony studyunder the direction f eitherof them.Eachbelongedto a different ation, nd whatever imilaritiesheremaybe in their hought f specificssues, hat would have been derivedfromreading r occasionalattendance t disputationsr lectures, ot from ongpersonalcontact n the same academicenvironment. his is not to denyparallelsamongsomeof their deas. It is onlyto saythat the latter wowere not disciplesor students f Buridanin the normal sense of thatphrase. f a Buridanschoolexisted, nd I think t is a label that obscuresmore than it enlightens,t was based on a compatibilityf intellectualoutlookon certain ssues,not on any institutionalontext.

One case ofa student n the faculty f arts who was allowed to havea supervising aster rom utsidehis nation n a relationshiphat xtendedacross six weeksor more s of particularnterest, oth because it was un-usual and becauseit relates to Buridan'scareer. In November1345aDanishstudent, ohannesNicolai,17btained dispensationrom heEnglishnation to allowhim to respondand determine uringLent 1346 undera masterfrom he Frenchnation,Michael de Montecalerio.18 ichael's

15AUP, 272.OnBuser,ee G.H.Kneepkens,illemuserfHeusden'sbligationes-TreatiseObrogatum'n:K.Jacobied.),Argumentationstheorie.cholastischeorschungenudenogischennd emantischenegelnorrektenolgerns,eiden-Nework-Kln993, 43-

62,at 343-4.16AUP, 279,284,285.17Unless hedateM.CCC.XXIXn themanuscriptourcesa scribal rror orM.GGC.XLIX,his ohannesicolai e Dacia shouldedistinguishedromnotherDanish tudentf the ame namewho tudiedt Paris n 1329nd whomade nextractf thoseectionsfWalter urley'sepuntatertisogicaehat omplementedor contrastedithOckham's ummaogicae.he earlier ohannesicolaiwas aterthe Franciscanector t the conventn Linkping;rfurt, iss.Bibl.,CA 867,f. 123v:Hancextractionemelogicaurle rdinavitrateroannesNicholai,ector

de custodiaincopensi,rovinciaeaciae,quandotuduit arisius nno DominiM.CCC.XXIX. .18Montecalerio,iscussedyBerndMichael,ohannesuridan.tudienu nmebenseinen erkennd urRezeptioneinerheorienmEuropaes ptenittelaltersdoc.diss.FreieUniversitterlin 985, ol. I, 451-2,ndbyJeanCeleyretten this ssue fVivarium,ill e the ubjectf a separatetudy.


11/155

THEUNIVERSITYF PARISAT THE TIMEOFJEANURIDAN 9

family ame or placename correspondso Moncalieri on thesouthernedgeof Turin in Italy, nd he would thushavebelongedto the Bourgesprovinceof the French nation. n 1342,in response o the rotulusf theUniversity f Paris submitted t the time of the coronationof ClementVI, Michael receiveda provision s canon withexpectation f prebendin the cathedral hapter t Turin.19 resumablyhatexpectation ad notbeen realizedby 1346,since he was stillregentmaster t Paris.20Howlongbefore1342Montecaleriohad been a masterof arts s not known.He wrote a determinatoepunctowhich attacked the opinionsof JeanBuridan on the same subject,to which Buridanrespondedn his owndeterminatioepunctoBoth treatises ppear in the same manuscript.21fthese two texts date to the same periodas Buridan'squestioepossibilitateexistendiecundumadem t non xistendiimuln eadem nstantiwhichappearslater in the same manuscript nd is dated 1335,then Montecalerio'scareeras a master n the faculty f arts spannedat least a decade.22

WhydidJohannesNicolai seek anoutside upervisingmaster, nd whydid he choose Montecalerio?No Danishmasterappearsto have beenregent n the Englishnation at the timehe asked fora dispensation,utotherregentmastersn the Englishnationwere available.Johannes'peti-tion, herefore, usthave beenarguedon different rounds. t wouldbeinterestingo conjecture n earlystageof the Wegestreit,hat the studentwanteda supervisingmasterwho wasa realist nd could not find uchamongthe availablemasters n the Englishnation. This is unlikelynlight f the campaignwithin heEnglishnation n 1341againstthe sectaOccamicaand because Conradof Megenberg, leadingopponentof theOckamists,pparently eturned o Paris in the winter f 1346 to over-see the Lentendetermination f another student n the

Englishnation,Albert f Prague.23lthough hanges n the nception aths between1355and 1365removed the language forbiddinghe scientia ccamica?*t isimprobable hatJohannesNicolaicould not have founda realistmaster

19Rotuliarisienses.upplicationsothe operomheUniversityfPans vol. : 1316-1349ed.W.J. ourtenay,eiden 002,118.20AUP, 94,where henames writtens MonteCalvario.21Oneof he womanuscriptsontaininguridan'sreatisesParis, ibl.Nat. at.16621,f.196r-202r.heonly nownopy fMontecalerio'sreatises nthe amemanuscript,f. 14r-223v.eanCeleyrettesin theprocessfediting ontecalerio'swork.22Ibid., f. 33r-237r.23AUP, 93.24W.J.Courtenay,heRegistersf heUniversityfPans and hetatutesgainstheScientiaccamicain:Vivarium,9(1991),3-49,t 40-4.


12/155

10 WILLIAM.GOURTENAY

for his 1346determination adontology

een amajor

consideration.year aterhe inceptedunder Laurentius etri ofDenmark,who had beentrainedby NicholasDrukken,whoin turn ownedworksof Ockham andwhosewritings n physicswere anti-realist.25

JohannesNicolai's decisionto seeka supervisingmaster outsidehisnationwasprobably ccasionedby the imited vailabilityf ecture paceunder the control f hisnation, nd his inability r reluctance opay therental ostsof a private rrangement utside he nation.1346 wasa high-demandyearon lecture oomsfordeterminationy studentsn theEnglishnation, exceededonly three times in the remainder of the century.26Parallel to the arrangement y whicha candidate n one nationseekingto be licensedcould avoid thequotalimits n anyoneyear by arrangingto be licensedundera master n a nation that had not filled ts quota,soperhapsa candidate fordetermination,acedwith the inability o findmaster n his own nationwho controlledpacefor ectures y thosedeter-mining,mightreceivepermission o makearrangements ith a masterin anothernationthat did have space.As a masterwho had probablybeenregent ormany years n the French nation,yetwho,as an Italian,mayhavehad fewer tudents nder hissupervision,ichaeldeMontecaleiiomay have been able toprovide ecture pacefor a determiningtudentat a mutually cceptablefinancial rrangement.

The case ofJohannesNicolai and masterMichael de Montecaleriosan exception o the rule that students weresupervisedy a masterfromtheir wn nation,usuallyby one from heir wn country r region.Thisparticularnstancewasprobably result f temporary xpediencyroughton by an unusuallyhighdemand for ecture pacefor thosedeterminingin the Englishnation. The selectionof a supervisingmaster n normalcircumstancesas basedon geographynd, if a changewasneeded,onthe powerand self-advantage senior master n the nation could offerto a student. ut magisterialupervisionidnotnecessarilyandprobablyrarely includeany intellectual ormation. he shapingof philosophicaloutlookor commitment as more ikely result f classroom xperience,library ccess,privatereadingand study, nd personalcontactsoutsidethe formal tructures f the nation and the curriculum.

25 ee ntroductiono Nicolaus rukkeneDacia,Operaed. N.G.Green-Pedersenand S. Ebbesen,auniae1997,xvii-xxi,xiv;WJ. Courtenaynd K.H.Tachau,OckhamOckhamists,nd he nglish-Germanationt Paris, 339-1341in:HistoryfUniversities,(1982),3-96.


13/155

THE UNIVERSITYFPARISAT THETIMEOFJEANURIDAN 11

Identifyingormativentellectualelationshipsn medievalaris s difficult

becauseit could occuroutside he normal tructures f the faculty f arts,becauseit was rarely cknowledgedirectly, nd becausein mostcasesit was probablya resultof listening nd readingrather than personalcontact.The higher reputation f a particularmaster, he largerwasthe audienceforhis deasandsupportingrguments. nd the moreprolifiche became,he argerwas hisreadership.o that xtentwe canassume hatBuridanhad an impact mongstudents nd mastersn the faculty f artsfar outsidethose n the Picard nationand, through iswritings, ar out-

side Paris. For example,Buridan's commentariesn Aristotle's hysicsweredisseminatedy manyscholars utsidehisnation, speciallyhroughGermanscholars n the Englishnation who carriedcopiesto Prague,Erfurt, nd elsewheren central nd easternEurope,and through taliansin the French nation who carried those worksto Italian universities,nsome caseswell before heGreat Schism.Another xamplewould be theinfluence f Ockham'swritings nd thought t Paris,since it wouldbea fair assumptionhat those associatedwith the secta ccamicas well asotherswho,likeGregory f Rimini, doptedmuch of Ockham'snaturalphilosophy ever met Ockhampersonally.In a fewcases theintellectual ebt of a student r unior colleaguetoa regentmaster s acknowledged.One must be careful, owever,not toconfuse cademiccourtesyfor xample, uchexpressionss myreverendmaster or my reverend ather )with academicfiliationn the sense ofa master/pupil relationship.Yet there seems to be more than mereHflichkeitt stake when the secularmasterof arts and later theologian,Marsiliusof Inghen,referred o the Cistercianmaster t Paris,JamesofEltville,s magistermeus bonememorie,magister acobusde Erbaco,whoseopinionshe often choed.27his samemaster, theologianecturingin a religiousonvent t Paris,alsohad a profound nfluence n Henryof Langenstein,whouponleavingParisin 1382spentseveralmonths tEltville'monastery f Eberbach,where the latterwasabbot,and whereHenry reread to the monks Eltville'sommentary n the Sentencesom-posedand read initially t Paris.28

26Tanaka 1990op. it., bove, .5),282.27Marsiliusf nghen, uestionesuperuattuoribrosententiarumStrasbourg501;repr. rankfurtMain1966,. 475v.28D.Trapp, ugustininheolog))f he 4th enturyin:Augustiniana,(1956),46-274, t 252.


14/155


It wouldbe unwise andunnecessary, owever,o

expandthesecases

of ntellectualnfluencento schools .Those concernedrobablydid notthink of themselves r their ntellectual ormationn that way. Moreimportantly, t highlights imilaritiesf thought n a fewissues at theexpenseof neglecting ifferencesn other reas.We are better ervedbyanalyzingthe relationship f medievalscholasticsssueby issueratherthan in terms f schools ofthought .

Supportor Universitycholars

Otherfactors utside heorganizationaltructure f the facultyf arts hapedthe academicenvironmentt Parisin the time of Buridan and Oresme.Amongthe more important f these werefinancial esourcesf studentsand masters, he impactof colleges,nd accessto booksand libraries.

In the second decadeof the fourteenth entury he leadershipof theUniversity f Paris launcheda campaignto strengthen nd expandthefinancialupport vailable tostudents nd masters. hey calleduponcar-dinals,bishops, nd abbots,either irectly r by means ofpapal pressure,to increase heamountofsupport or cholars rom heir ioceses hroughthe reservation nd assigning f benefices nd prebends.A number ofprelatesrespondedfavorably o thisplea,which n 1316coincidedwitha shift n papalpolicythat permitted heUniversityf Paris to submitlist of petitions rommasters o whichpopeJohn XXII mightrespondby assigningxpectationsf beneficesn the gift f variouspatrons. everalprelates longwitha few secularpatrons stablishedollegesat Paris forthe ostensibleupport f poorstudents.Within twenty-yeareriod 1314-1334)the number f collegest Paris almostdoubled.29lthough inancialneed was neversufficientlyddressed n the eyesof universitycholars,considerablemprovementad beenachievedn the first alfof the four-teenth entury.

Behindthe anguageof support orpoorscholars tated n universityletters nd petitions s wellas in the statutes f collegefoundations,hespecific roupthat wastargeted r that benefited y the new sourcesoffunding ere not thepoorest tudents,nd in mostcaseswerenot studentsat all. The rotulior scrollsof petitions, hat the universityubmitted o

29H. Rashdall,heUniversitiesfEuropen theMiddlegesed.F.M. PowickendA.B.Emden, vols., xford 936,, 537-539;.L.Gabriel,heCollegeystemntheFourteenthenturyniversitiesin:F.L.Udeyed.),The orwardovementf he ourteenthCenturyColumbus961, 9-124.


15/155


the papacywere imited o thosewho werealreadymastersn one of thefour aculties. iewed from hat perspective,heuniversityntended eneficesupport o be directed o teachers,not students, nd achieving placeon the ist wasbased onsenioritynd the ability opay the requiredfee,not on the basis of financial eed,although ccasionallyuch considerationswere used to structure he lists.30imilarly, ppointment o burses at thenewlyfounded ollegesweregranted o masters f arts or advancedstu-dents, ften hosewith onnections, ho werealready t Paris.The systemdid not facilitate, or was it probably ntended o facilitate,heability f

poor scholars to come to Paris.One had to be there already,and tohave been therefor numberofyears.Moreover, pecificimitations nthe amount of ecclesiastical r personalincome that could be receivedwhileholding burse wereusually tated n the collegestatutes, lthoughsuchprovisionswere not always strictlybserved.Thus the targetgroupfor college fellowshipsr burseswereyoungmastersn the faculty f artswho werestudying ora higherdegree,or advanced studentsn the fac-ulty f arts whohad already hown the talent hatwould resultn a sim-ilaracademic areer.Moststudents,speciallyhosewhosemainqualificationwaspoverty,werepassedover. In the case of the rotulithe limitationson wealth or income that were legislatedn collegestatutes layednorole in the process.Masters of noblebackground,who could and oftendidpetition hepope directly r through amilymembers, lsopetitionedthrough heuniversity otuluslongsidetheir ess fortunate olleagues.

Both Buridanand Oresmeprofited y the availabilityf collegeburses.Early n hiscareer,probably s a youngmaster f arts,Buridanobtaineda burse at the Collgedu CardinalLemoine,founded n the first ecadeof the fourteenth entury. f the statutes f the collegewereenforced,31he resignedhis fellowshipwhen he was elected rectorof the universityin December1327.Between thenand his acquiringa benefice,namelythe parishchurch of Hies north of Lensin Picardy,his principal f notsole meansof ncomewas from he feesofhisstudents.Whenhe obtainedthat first eneficen 1330,it was not a result f the expectation e hadreceived n the rotulus f 1329but was providedby the abbot of themonastery f St-Vaast at Arras.32n the case of Oresme,he receiveda

30For xample,nthe otulusf 1349,llfour ationsisted irsthosemasters hohadnotyet btained benefice,ollowedythosewhohadone or more eneficesbutat a level f ncomehepetitioneronsiderednsufficient;ee Rotuliarisiensesvol. , 305-443.31M.Flibien,istoiree a ville eParisvol.5,Paris1725,08,611.32For Buridan'srovisionsn 1329and1330,ee Rotuliarisiensesvol. , 52-4.


16/155


bursen

theologyn 1348at the

Collgede

Navarre,six or seven

yearsafter ecomingregentmaster n the faculty f arts.33 avarre,unlike heCollgedu CardinalLemoine,allowedfellows f the collegeto receiveincomefrom n ecclesiastical eneficeup to a certain evel,without os-ing theirbursein the college.

Collegeaffiliation layedan important olein scholarly roduction.Although he majority f those who received burses n variouscollegeshave leftno works hathavesurvived,mostmasterswhose workswe havewere associatedwith collegesat some time in their academic career.

Buridanis not known to have held a collegeburse after eavingtheCollgedu CardinalLemoine,but his earlier ssociationwouldhavegivenhim continued ccessto its library, houldhe have neededit. Oresmewas connectedwith the Collgede Navarre,as wereseveralproductivemasters, nd he becameits Grand Master n 1356.4The Sorbonne,lbeita collegefor theologians,had one of the largest ibraries n medievalParis, nd manyof ts memberswere activen publication,gain llustratingthe close connectionf collegeaffiliationnd scholarly roductivity.35oreveryproductive cholarwho,like Marsiliusof Inghen, s not known tohave beenassociatedwith college,here re manymore who were.Andwhether r not Conrad ofMegenberghad anyconnectionwith hecollegeforGermanmasters nd students, isearly onnectionwith he Cistercianhouseof studiesgavehim access tothat ibrary, ne of the largercol-lectionsn Paris ndparticularlyich n texts romOxford nd Cambridge.36

The support hat came by way of papalprovisions,lthoughunequalin distributionnd influenced y social classandpersonal onnections,idbenefit niversity asters. here s not,however, direct orrelation etweenthe number of ecclesiasticalositions nd incomeacquiredand the pro-ductivity f Parisian scholars.The point has been madeby comparingthe careers of Buridanand Oresme.37A comparisonof two contempo-raries n the Picardnation,Buridan nd Egidiusde Feno,isequally elling.

For more xtendediscussionfthis ssue,eeW.J. ourtenay,hilosophy'seward:the cclesiasticalncomef ean uridanin:Recherchesethologietphilosophiedi-vales,8 (2001),63-9.33On Oresme'scademicareer, eeNathalieorochov,eCollgeeNavarreesafondation1305)u dbutuXVeicle1418),aris1997,80-1;W.J.Courtenay,The arly areerfNicoleresmein: sis, 1(2000),42-8.34

Gorochov997op. it., bove, . 5),680-1.35R. Rouse,TheEarly ibraryf he orbonne,n:Scriptorium,1 (1967),2-71,227-51.36OnMegenberg'sonnectionith heCollgeeSt-Bernard,eeW.J. ourtenay,ConradfMegenberg.he ansTears,n:Vivarium,5(1937),02-24.37Courtenay001op. it., bove, .5).


17/155

THEUNIVERSITYF PARISAT THE TIMEOFJEANURIDAN 15

Both Buridanand Fenowereregentmasters f arts n the 1330s.Feno,a realist,was one of the opponents gainstwhom Buridanargued n sev-eral determinationsetween1332and 1335,specificallyn his De depen-dentiis,iveritatibust convenientiis1332), Defensioneseterminationisediversi-tate enerisdspeciem1333),and his Tractatuse relationibus1334).8Buridanand Feno wereamongthe sixty-four asters n the Picard nation whopetitioned enedictXII for an expectationf benefice t the time of thenewpope'scoronationn 1335.9Buridan eceivedothing. eno wasamongthe eightwho did receivean expectation.Manyof those in the facultyof arts who were awardedsomething,ncludinghosen the Picardnation,weresimultaneouslytudents n a higher aculty, sually heology. n thecaseof Feno,hisprovisionwas not a simplebeneficebut an expectationof a canonicalprebend n a muchsought-afterollegiatehurch, t-Pierreat Lille. Feno hadprobablyust begunhisstudiesn thefaculty f theologyby 1335,sinceby 1343 he was a fellow f theSorbonne,had completedhistwoyears s biblicalursor, nd waspreparing o read the Sentences40 ythat imehe had obtained heprebend t Lille and received romClementVI an expectation f a canonicalprebendin the cathedralchapteratTournai.Within he next few yearshe obtained a canonicalprebendatCourtrai,became dean of itschapter, nd in 1350,by then doctor oftheology, e wasgranted canonicalprebendand the lectorshipn the-ologyat Arras.41uridan,by contrast, ad receivedvery ittle n the wayof benefice upportduringhiscareer, nd the expectationf a canonicalprebendat Arras that he had been grantedby Clement VI never mate-rialized. The difference etween their different ates of successin thisarea canprobably e ascribed o Feno'shaving tudied heology, btaininga burseat the Sorbonne,knowingts provisorPierre

Roger(thefuture

ClementVI)personally,nd completing is doctorate.AlthoughBuridansometimes eferred o a fellow rts master s doctor, ubstantial ccle-siastical ncomewent argely othose cholarswho were doctorsn thenor-mal senseof that itle, amelymasters f theology,anonlaw,or medicine.

38Michael 985op. it., bove, . 5),427-43.39Charlesulliez,utour'un otulusdressar 'UniversiteParisBenotII(1335):lerle esmatress arts e a nationicardein:Mlangesel'EcoleranaiseeRome.

MoyenAge,1142002),59-369. n Feno'srovision,ee Rotuliarisienses, 75.40Rotuliarisienses, 191-2.41Analectaaticano-Blgicavol. :SuppliqueseClmentI 1342-1352),d. U.Berlire,Rome-Bruxelles-Paris906,#1955.


18/155


Buridan nd theengthf Teaching

areersnArtsIt has longbeen supposedthat Buridan was uniquein teaching n thefaculty f arts for ver thirty ears without tudyingnd seeking degreena higher aculty. e wascertainly he most famousmaster o follow hatcareerpath, but it now appearsthat he was not the onlyone to do so.

Beforeexamining he other cases,somecautionary emarksneed tobe made.First, t would be incorrect o statecategoricallyhatBuridannever studied n a higherfaculty, uchas theology.We simplyhavenoevidence that he did, and there are several examplesof arts masters tParis whosesupplicationso the papacyor letters f provisiondescribethem imply s masters f arts, lthough ne supplicationated n betweenthe others mentions hat the individual was alsostudying n theology.Thus the failure o mention tudy n a higherfacultywhensupplicatingthe pope is no guaranteethat the individualmaster never did so. Wehave veryfew documents onnectedwith Buridan that are of the typethat would mention heologicaltudy ven had he undertaken t. Thus,whilehe never attained degree n theology r in any otherhigher ac-

ulty,we cannot

aywith

ompletessurance hathe never tudied

heology.As to the lengthof his teachingcareer withoutevidence ofhigherstudy, here re severalother xamplesfrom he sameperiod.42etrus eVallepartiswasmasterof arts by 1331,supplicatedn the rotuli f 1342and 1349,and againin 1362.If his regencywas not interrupted, hatwouldmean a teaching areer n arts of over thirty-one ears.The sameholds true for Robertus Fabri, Honoratus de Porta, HenricusBobei,JohannesChacardi,JohannesDurandi,JohannesSieranviller,nd PetrusMelmete illwith teachingcareers n arts of thirty earsor more. In

the case of Guillelmus eMoreto,regent n artsforoverthirty-four ears,JohannesBaril,regent n arts for overthirty-four ears, nd Andreas deSanctoClodoaldo,regent n arts for over thirty-seven ears,we knowthat hey lso studiedn a higher aculty,anonlawin the case of Moretoand theologyn the case of Baril and Sancto Clodoaldo.Longcareerswithout videnceof study n a higherfaculty re certainly are,but theuniquenessof Buridan n this regardcan no longerbe maintained.

This shouldcaution us againstseeing n Buridan the beginning f acareerself-consciouslyevoted olely ophilosophynd intentionallyass-ing up the careeropportunitieshat a theologicaldegreeoffered. hose

42Thefollowingxamplesre akenrom otuliarisienses,ol., andRotuliarisiensesvol.2:1352-1378ed.W.J. ourtenaynd E.D.Goddard,eiden 003.


19/155


who completedstudy n a higherfaculty ained ecclesiasticalositionsthat broughtconsiderablencome. It is possible,of course,that theseother examplesof long teaching areers n arts were alsoattempting omake the teachingof philosophy career in itself. suspect,however,that motivations ere moremixed, nd the absence of universityecordsthat wouldprovecontinuous egency r the certain bsence ofstudy na higherfacultymakes conclusionsn this area hypothetical.

The availabilityf new sourcesand evidence for the Universityf Paris

in the fourteenth entury uts the careersof Buridan and Oresmein aricher ontext. t helpsus understandmorepreciselyhe academic struc-ture nd environmentn whichthey ivedand wrote. t clarifies hemeansof influence mongmasters nd students, eparating hose contexts hatwereunlikely o haveproducedany shapingof intellectual utlookfromthose that are more viable. It has alsobrought o lightnew informationon some of the opponentsf Buridan, pecificallyichael de Montecalerioand Egidiusde Feno. In so doing the originality nd importanceofBuridan and Oresmehas not been diminished ut rather nhancedbyseeingthemmoreclearly n the context n whichthey ived.

Madison,WisconsinUniversityf Wisconsin


20/155

The Buridan choolReassessed.JohnBuridan nd Albert f Saxony*

J.M.M.H.HIJSSEN

IntroductionThroughout he fifteenth nd sixteenth enturies ohn Buridanenjoyeda reputation s a prominentmaster f arts at Paris. The manuscriptsndearly printed ditionsof his workswerewidelydisseminatedn all cor-ners of Europeand becamerequiredreadingat manyuniversities,uchas Vienna,Prague,Krakow, Rostock,nd Saint Andrews.1 ut how washis impactamongthose whoknewhimpersonally,mongthoseresidingin Paris n the first alf of the fourteenth entury? id Buridan haveanyclosefollowers r students?As far as I am aware,there s no contem-porary Parisianevidenceto the effect hat there existed a school ofBuridanists n the same way as there were schools of Thomists or

Scotists. venso,one might sk whether here s some evidenceto iden-tify, n retrospect, school of Buridan n fourteenth-centuryaris.2

*This rticles dedicatedoHenk raakhuis,agistereusnevery ossibleenseftheword,n the ccasionfhis ixty-fifthirthday.arts f his rticle ormedhe asisof ecturesgaven March 000t the Centre 'Etudesuprieurese la Renaissancein Tours nd nApril002t the MedievalcademynNewYork. thankoelBiardandGyulalima or heir ind nvitations.thankaulBakker,illiamourtenay,irk-JanDekker,rgenarnowskyndMichieltreijgeror heir elpfuluggestions.1B.Michael,ohannesuridanStudienu einemebenseinen erkenndur ezeptioneinerTheorienm uropaesptenittelalters2vols, h.D.dissertationreie niversitterlin,1985,ol.1,239-398.2At his oint shouldlready entionhatn1551 Maison eBuridans attestedamonghe choolsf he icard ation,nd ndicatedn oldmaps.eenote 5.Couldthis avebeen hehouse hat uridaneft o theuniversityt hisdeath?ee Michael1985op.it.,bove,.1),vol.1,237,sp.n. 533for n ndicationf he ources,hichare ll ater han he ourteenthentury.here lso s some videnceromhe ifteenth-centuryhinkerominicusfFlandriad. 1479),homentionsviewwhichs held yBuridanists.ee Dominicusf

Flandria, uaestionesuperIIlibros

etaphysicorum,V,q. 2,a. 5;ed. Venetiis523,eprintedrankfurtmMain, 967,ol. 6ra:Alii erosunt uiponuntnumonceptumraecisum,uitamenonceptusst nus nitatenalo-giae,t non nitate nivocationis,icutunt uridanistaequiponuntuod onceptusntis,siaccipiaturecundume,estunivocus;ivero ccipiaturxparte ei onceptibilisstanalogus,raecisusamen.

Koninklijkerill V,Leiden,004 Vivarium2,1Alsovailablenline www.brill.nl


21/155

THE BURIDANCHOOLEASSESSED 19

If we take PierreDuhem(1861-1916)as a starting oint,thisquestionseems ohavebeen examinedornearly century. speciallyfter uhem'sstudies, he Buridan School at theUniversity f Paris won everybody'sadmiration and was establishedas a historicalfact. In brief, Duhemclaimed that the accomplishmentsf seventeenth-centurycience,asexemplifiedn Galilei andDescartes,had in essencelreadybeen achievedin the fourteenth entury t the faculty f arts n Paris,and particularly,by the school of John Buridan.3With respectto this school,Duhemoffered he followingbservationsn his Systmeu monde

Lesenseignementsde Buridan]urentrs idlementeust dveloppsardesmatresminents,arAlberteHelmstoedt,urnommlberteSaxe,arTmonlefils uJuif, arNicoleresme,arJeanMarsile'Inghen.a facultesArtsde Paris ut insi, endantnedemi-sicle,'Ecolee Buridan.4And again:

Aprsuridant Albert eSaxe,aScolastiquee trouvelus ien e nouveaudire ur a nature umouvement;ommel advientresqueoujours,a lectureesoeuvrese Marsile'Inghenous nnoncee dclin e 'cole e Paris.5

Nowadays,historians f scienceagreethat Duhem's visionof the Buridanschool as an anticipation f seventeenth-centuryatural philosophyswrong.Yet, this has not diminished n any way the highesteem for theBuridan school. Even severe critics fDuhem,suchas AnnelieseMaierand MarshallClagett,haveemphasizedthat the school of Buridanwasone of the two most prominent choolsof medieval naturalphilosophy(theotherbeingthe schoolof Thomas Bradwardined. 1349)at MertonCollegein Oxford, lso known as the OxfordCalculators).AccordingoMaier, the preciseteacher-student elations between the members ofthe Buridan school wereunknown, lthough heschool wasclearly har-acterizedby its unitary eachingtradition nd its intellectual hysiog-nomy. 6 ven thoughMaier was more cautiousthan Duhem,the picturethat thus emergedwas that of the Buridan school as a coherent nnercircle of students nd followers, ithJohn Buridan himself t its center.The existence f a Buridan schoolin fourteenth-centuryaris has been

3Pierreuhem,esystmeumonde.istoirees octrinesosmologiquesePlatonCopernicParis, 914-1958,ol.6,697 and lsovol. , 200, 15-6,nd225. am not uggestingthat henotionf Buridanchoolriginatedith he tudiesyDuhem.4Duhem914-1958op.it.,bove,.3),vol.6,698.5Duhem 914-1958op.it.,bove,.3),vol. , 361.6Annelieseaier, ieVorluferalileism 4.JahrhundertRoma1949,.


22/155


23/155

THEBURIDANCHOOLEASSESSED 21

Albert f Saxonysprobably estknown s the founder f the Universityof Viennain 1 64. Beforehis involvement ith thisnewuniversity, ow-ever,he enjoyeda distinguishedareer in Paris.He took hisdegrees nthe arts facultyn Paris n 1351,under masterAlbert f Bohemia.Beforehe arrived n Paris,he probably tudied n Erfurt. riginating rom heregionof Helmstedt, e belongedto the English-Germanation. Severaltimes,he fulfilled ffices t this nation. n 1353 hestarted tudying he-ology,but probablynevertookhisdegree.From 1366/67untilhis deathonJuly 8, 1390,he was Bishopof Halberstadt.Alberttoo wrotemanycommentaries.speciallyhis commentaries n De celo and thePhysicswereinfluentialnd survive n manycopies.

NicoleOresme was bornn thevicinity f Caen. Hisnamefirst ppearsin universityecordsn 1346,as a student f theology t the CollgedeNavarre. From a papal letter that was recently ediscovered,we nowknow that n 1342,he alreadywas a masterof arts.10n 1356,Oresmebecame rector of the Collgede Navarre,which meansthat he musthave had his doctoraten theology y then. n 1377,he wasnominatedBishopof Lisieux.He diedonJuly 11, 1382.Oresme is well knownforhis French ranslationsf some of Aristotle's reatises. e alsowroteLatincommentariesn De animaDe celo,Degenerationet corruptioneMetheoraand the Physics.esides thefactthat he belongedto the Norman nation,not much is known of Oresme' career at the arts faculty.

ThemonJudeusoriginated romMnster n Westphalia,nd, as a con-sequence,belongedto the English-Germanation. LikeAlbert,he toohad a distinguishedareeras an officer f this nation.Between1349 and1353he was absentfrom aris,probablybecause of thePlague,as HenriHugonnard-Rocheconjectured.During this period Themon taught nErfurt t the school of the Scotch BenedictineAbbeyof St.Jacob, oneof the so-calledGermanSchottenklster.ote that Albert of Saxonyalsostayed n Erfurt uringthat period.It is unknownwhether heykneweachotherfromErfurt, ut they certainlymust have known each otherfrom he English-Germanation. n 1361 Albert ucceededThemon asreceptorof that nation. Themon wrotea commentary n Aristotle'sMetheora.is otherworks re treatises n astronomy.11

10 ee William. Courtenay,he arly areerfNicoleresmein: sis, 1 2000),42-8.11t hasnowbeen stablishedhat hemon ied n 1361.ee William. CourtenayandEricD.Goddard,otuliarisienses:upplicationso heoperomhe niversityf arisvol.I:1352-1378Leiden-Kln-Boston004, .


24/155

22 J.M.M. . THIJSSEN

Marsilius ofInghenwas born near the city of Nijmegen.He is first

mentioned n the records n 1362,when he took his degreein arts atParis underhis DutchcountrymanWilliamBuser of Heusden.Like Albertand Themon,he belongedto the English-Germanation, n which heheldmanyadministrativeffices. e was rector wice 1367;1371),anduniversity elegateat the papal court. n 1366 hestarted o study he-ology n Paris,but onlytookhis degreein 1395/96in Heidelberg.Histransferenceo Germanywas connectedwith his involvement ith thefoundation f the new university f Heidelberg 1386).Most influential

amongthe manyAristotle ommentaries e wrote,was the one on Degenerationet corruptione.If one reviewshebiographiesf these fivemasters, everaldetailsare

striking.With the exceptionof Themon,they all commented n manyworksby Aristotle,omeof them even several timeson the same work.All of them were secularmasters t the arts faculty n Paris.However,theybelongedto different ations.Allof them held important dminis-trative ffices or their espectiveation.Two ofthem,Albert f Saxony,and Marsiliusof Inghen,became even involvedn the foundation f newuniversities,amelyVienna andHeidelberg.With the exception fJohnBuridan,they all at somepoint in their career,moved on to theology.Two of them,Albertof Saxonyand NicoleOresme,eventually ecamebishops.n brief, heyall wereprominent ersonalities,oth in intellec-tual affairs s in matters f governmentnd administration.

In my attempt o seek newperspectivesn the Buridanschool, havebeen followingwo,rather obvious,ines of inquiry.The first pproachis institutional. he secondline of inquiry s doctrinal.Bothhark backon medieval notionsof school that are stillusedin contemporary is-toriography.12

The Buridan chool:he nstitutionalerspectiveThe basic medievalmeaningof school was thatof the classroomwherethe teachingtook place.The city of Paris hostedmany such schools,locatedin specific reas. They were the venues of medieval ntellectuallife.What role did specificocationshavein the making f late-medieval

(natural)philosophy?Or,in other

words,how

probableis it that Albert

12William.Courtenay,choolsnd cholarsnFourteenth-CentwynglandPrinceton,J1987,71-5 ndOlgaWeijers,erminologiees niversitsu XIIIe icleRoma1987,3-5.


25/155

THEBURIDANCHOOLEASSESSED 23

of Saxony,NicoleOresme,ThemonJudeusand Marsilius f nghenwerestudentsn Buridan'sschool,as has beenassumedn muchof the schol-arly iterature? o occasional references o my master n the worksofsomeof these authors, f they applyto Buridan at all, have a deepersignificance,r are they standard forms of courtesy o address(senior)colleagues?13

The faculty f arts n Paris was the combination f four maller units,the French,Picard,Norman and English-Germanations.Geographicalorigindetermined o whichnation a master or student wouldbelong.Together, he nations acted as the faculty f arts, presidedoverby therector. n addition to their common duties,such as the conferment fdegreesand the establishment f the curriculum, he nations exercisedactivities s separate corporate components.Each nation had its ownofficers, evenues,reasury, eal,patron saints, nd authority o regulateitsown members.The head of the nation was the proctor.Amongotherthings, e summonedthe assembliesof the membersof his nation andpresidedover their meetings.

Sinceteachingwasorganisedby nation,the questionwhich neededto investigatewas, whether the Norman Oresme,and the Anglo-Germans Albert of Saxony,ThemonJudeus, and Marsilius ofInghencouldpossiblyhave been students f the Picard John Buridan.14 hisleadquestion aisedother uestionsuch as how the schoolsof the nationswereorganised, nd which students heyrecruited. robablydue to thepoverty f the sources,urprisinglyittle asbeenwritten n these aspectsofuniversity istory.n whatfollows, shallpresent oth well-known ndlesswidelyknownaspectsof the schoolsof the nations n Paris.15

13Courtenay987op.it.,bove,.12), 91hasdrawnttentionothis imensionfthe pithetmyreverend)aster.n theQuaestionesuperibrosegenerationet orruptioneed. Venice 501photomechanicaleprintrankfurt.M.,1970),ol. 06va,MarsiliusfIngheneferso Buridannthisway:Etquiahecopiniomihi robabilispparet,esciosipassionatusxopinione agistieimagistiohanniridanuiearn osuit,deo arninsuis artibusersuadereroponot earn mmediateeclararentendo. ccordingoBenotatar, aphysiquee rugeseBuridant e raitu iel 'Alberte axe2vols,ongueuil(Qubec)001,ol.1,507*-8*hreeuch eferencesnAlbertf axony'suaestionesuperlibrose celohouldlsobe read s referencesoJohn uridan.atar onsidershe our-tesy itlessproofhat lbert fSaxonyas pupil fBuridan.14

Notehat, or easonsf hronology,t may ave eenmpossiblehatMarsiliusfInghenver ersonallyet ohn uridan,ince he atter ay lreadyavebeendeadwhenMarsiliusame oParis.15What ollowssheavilyndebtedo thefollowingublications:uctariumhartulariiUniversitatisarisiensised. Henri eniflendEmilehatelain,aris 894,ol.1,pp.xxvi-xxxiii;dolpheerty, opographieistoriqueu ieuxaris5vols,aris 866-1897,sp. ol.


26/155

24 J.M.M. .THIJSSEN

From the minutes f the meetingseld

bythe

English-Germanation

as recordedn its proctors'book{liberrocuratorum),t appearsthat manyof the nation'sexpenseswent to the purchase,upkeep,and repairof theschools.On the basis of these records, t is even possibleto reconstructmore or less accuratelyhe locationof the nations' several choolsn theRue de Fouarre.The schoolsof the French nationwereadjacentto thoseof the Normans,whichin their turn werenext to those of the Picardsand the English-Germanation.On the oppositeside of the streetwereadditional chools of the Picards and of the English-Germanation. At

times, he nationswouldeven sharea building.16s from he second halfof the fourteenth entury 1358), the Rue de Fouarrewas closed off tnightby woodenbarriers. hey servedto prevent hedepositof litter nthe streets, bout which the mastershad bitterly omplained.Althoughaccordingto regulations romthe earlyfourteenth entury, t was for-bidden to set up schools outsideof the Rue de Fouarre, n the atter halfof that century, he nations had to seek other ocations for schools,norder to accommodatethe increasingnumberof students nd masters.

In any case,it is clear that each of the nations rented,owned andmaintained uildingswhichtheydistributedmongtheirmasters or thepurposeofteaching. rom the French nd Picard nationswehaverecordsabout how the schools wereassignedto their masters.Onlythe regentmasters, hat s, those masterswho wereactively eachingnot ust resid-ing)during he GrandOrdinary, defined eriodoftimewhichran fromOctober1 untilEaster,were entitled o have a schoolassignedo them.By 1371,under the rectorship f Marsilius f nghen, he old customwasabolished underwhich masterswere to retainthe schoolstheyhad usedin the previousyear. Instead,the schools were now distributed mongthe regentmasters ach yearbetweenthe feast of BartholomewAugust,24)and SaintRemigiusOctober,1),the beginning f the academicyear.

One of the majordutiesof anymaster, f course,was tosupervisehestudyof his students. ut where did these students ome from?Thanksto a prosopographicaltudyby MineoTanaka it is possibleto giveanimpression f the geographicalriginsof the student populationof the

(Rgionentralee 'universit),hichncludesmap,howinghe ocationsf he ifferentschools;ray . Boyce,he nglish-Germanationnthe niversityf arisuringheMiddleAges,ruges927,13-49;earl ibre, he ationsn he ediaevalniversitiesCambridge,Mass.1948,2-97.16n 1393 icardsccupiedhe ppertoryf choolswnedy he nglish-Germans.Controversyrose ver hemaintainancef he uilding.


27/155


English-Germanation.17anaka was interestedn

studyinghe relations

between tudents nd masters. o thispurpose,he investigated hich tu-dentstooka degreeunderwhich master.He focusedon the three majorstages n the academiccareer: the determinationdeterminatici),he license(iicentia, and the nceptioninceptio).18anaka wasmainly nterestedn thepatterns hatoccurredn thesupervisionf the academicstudy, or nstancein the number of studentswho took all three degreesunder the samemaster, r who switched o anothersupervisorfter he determination,or after he license.His prosopographictudy makesone point abun-

dantly lear.Students ooktheir egreeswithmasters f their wn nation.19More in particular, heyseemedto seek out mastersfrom their ownregion.20ccasionally,t did happenthat a candidateobtainedhis licenseunder a masterfrom another nation. However,this practicewas dueto the fixednumberof bachelors hat each nationwas allowedto exam-ine for the license eachmonth.21 he proctor'sbook of the English-Germannationsinglesout the candidateswho tooktheir icense undera master f another nationwithan epithet.Theyare callednormanizatusjbicarizatus, r gallicatusbut they remainedmembers of the English-German nation.22The nations did not take lighdy heirprerogative ver the academicdegrees.Two bitterdisputes bout the boundariesof the nationswereprecipitated y controversiesver the inceptionof candidates.n 1266,Jean de Ulliaco,resident f a dioceseof Beauvais,and hencebelonging

17Mineoanaka,

anationngio-altemande

e 'UniversiteParis lafin

uMoyenge,Paris,990.18Note hat nly egent astersere llowedosupervisehedetermination.his snot rue or he ther wo xams.19 anaka 990op.it., bove,. 17), 56-85.20The resultsfTanaka'studyoincide ith he esultsf geographicalnalysisfthe aris cademicommunityarriedut yWilliamourtenay,n the asis fdifferentsource aterialnd oa differenturpose.e too oncludedhat, ornstance,heodg-

ing f he cademicommunityas ccordingoregionalr inguisticies. eeWilliamJ. Courtenay,arisiancholarsn hearlyourteenthentury.SocialortraitCambridge999,81-91.21 OnMarch6, 1338,he acultyuled hat f the ixteencholarshowould e

examinedor he icensenarts t Ste. Geneviveachmonth,ixwere o be fromheFrenchation,ourach romheNormanndPicardations,nd wo romhe nglish-Germanation,fwhichalfwould e examinedt each udition. ee Kibre 948(op.it., bove, . 15),101,ndChartulariumniversitatisarisiensis,d. Henri eniflendmilehatelain,vols,aris 889-97,ol.2,474.22Tanaka 990op.it.,bove,. 17), 53-4.


28/155


to the Picard nation,wishedto inceptn

the Frenchnation.The Picards,however,not onlyclaimedhim,but seizedhim bodily.23More interesting or our purposeis anotherconflict,which arosein

1356,and which involvedsome of the main characters f the Buridanschool.In that year, a certainJohn Mast passedthrough he Rue duFouarrewith he beadles of the Picard nation to seekthepermissionromthe masters f arts to incept, s was the custom.24 aster ThemonJudeusfrom the English-Germannation, however, refusedhis approval.Hepointed ut that ohnMast hadalreadydeterminedn theEnglish-Germannation.25 he earlierdisputebetween hetwo nationsover Mast'sdegreesstillhad not been resolved. or thisreason,he had to refrain rom ttach-ing himself o either nation. The ensuingdiscussions etweenthe twonations,whichdraggedon until the end of 1358,are welldocumented.The conclusion of the debate wasthat the English-Germansnd thePicards settled n the river Meusein the Low countries s the bound-ary between their two nations.The geographicalnd linguistic amifac-tions of the debate need not concernus here. What is interestings, thatJohn Buridanpresented he case ofthe Picards before he committee fdeputieswhich had to decide the dispute;26hatThemonJudeussubsti-tutedthe absentproctor f the English-Germanation, nd that amongthosemasterswhosigned hefinal greementwerenotonlyJohn Buridan,but also Albertof Saxony.As usual,the meetingwas roundedoff n atavern.After he treatywassigned, he masters elebratedn a pub calledAt the grange (Ad grangiam).art of the bill was paid by a master

William Buser ofHeusden,who not only happenedto be a local fromthe contested egion, ut who also was themasterunderwhom Marsilius

23Chartulariumniversitatisarisiensis,ol.1,nr. 09.24 eeGray .Boyce,he ontroversyverheoundaryetweenhenglish-Germannd icardNationsn he niversityf aris1356-1358),n:H. Vander inden.a. eds),tudes'Histoireddiesla mmoireeHenriirenneBruxelles937,5-66 orn analysisf the ncidentand discussionf he ources.25Auctariumhartulariiniversitatisarisiensisvol.1,206:Item 9adieejusdemensisfactarat ongregadopud anctumulianumauperumuper uodamacalario,omineJohannisast, eodiensisyoc.,uidumncipereolebatt ransiissetum edellisacionisPycardieervicum traminisd petendumicenciammagistrisacultatisrtium, t

morumst, i ncepciouandicta acltateisplaceret,esponditagisterhemoudeusnacionisnglicane,uodnon, oquodlias eterminansuitnsuanacione,t uper ocorta uissetisnter aistrosacionisycardietnacionisnglicaneredictarum,x oquodquelibetacio umdicebatertinered suam acionem,t super ocdiscussumuissetinfacltateredicta,uod ecmagise tenereebetd unam acionemuamd aliam..26Auctariumhartulariiniversitatisarisiensisvol.1,212-8.


29/155


of nghenwouldinceptfouryears ater.27 t the basis of the dispute verthe nations'boundarieswere financial oncerns.The students ad to paya fee to the nation for their exams,and it was this financialdimensionwhich causedthe commotion.

The episodeillustrates, believe,that t is highly uestionable o viewAlbert f Saxony,Nicole Oresmeand ThemonJudeusas students t theschools of thePicardJohn Buridan.As mentionedbove,in the cases ofAlbertof Saxonyand Marsilius ofInghen, t is even attested hat theytook their degreeswith master Albert of Bohemia and WilliamBuser,

respectively,ho camefrom he sameregions s theirgraduates.On thebasisof the above evidence fromuniversityources, he most mmediatetask n Buridanresearchies, think, n untanglinghe doctrinal ffiliationsthat are reflectedn the writings y Buridanhimself nd in thoseby hisallegedfollowers.

TheBuridan chool:hedoctrinalerspectiveWith respectto examiningBuridan'sdoctrinalfollowingn fourteenth-century aris, will imitmyattention o his commentariesn the Physicsand relate them to the commentary y Albertof Saxony.This choiceseemsnatural or everalreasons.First, uridan'sQuaestionesn the Physicsstood at the heart of the entire onceptof a Buridan school.Moreover,there re a few ndications n the scholarlyiterature, bout which morebelow,thatAlbertusedBuridan'sPhysics.nd finally, e can now benefitfrom he editionof Albert f Saxony'sQuaestionesn the Physicsy BenotPatar and the nearly ompleted ditionof one of Buridan'stexts.28

If we want to understand heimpactof Buridan'sPhysicspon Albertof Saxony,we must remember riefly ome facts bout its transmission.At present wolongversions f Quaestionesn the Physicsre beingattrib-uted toJohn Buridan.One has been handed downin four manuscriptsand is sometimes eferred o as the tertiaectura.29he other versionhas

27Auctariumhartulariiniversitatisarisiensisvol.1,233-6.28AlbertfSaxony'shysicsasbeen ditedn Benotatar, xpositiotQuaestionesnAristotelishysicamdAlbertme axoniattrbutae.ditionritique3vols,ouvain-Paris999.

AcriticalditionfJohn uridan'suaestionesuperctoibroshysicorum,ecundumltimamlecturamsbeing reparedya team f editors,ncludingirk-Janekker, lafPluta,Michieltreijgernd thepresentuthor,t the CenterorMedievalndRenaissanceNaturalhilosophyt Nijmegenniversity.29Thismplieshat herehould e two ther, arlierersionsfBuridan'suaestioneson the hysics.f they xist t all, hey avenotbeen dentifiedet.


30/155

28 J.M.M. .THIJSSEN

been preservedn 31 manuscriptsnd one printed ditionfrom 1509.0

In the survivingestimonies,t is commonlyabeled as theultimaectura.The tertiaecturaeems to precedethe ultimaectura. he latter s longer,in that there re more quaestionesbut also moreelaborateargumentsnda morepolished tyle. here seem to be few, f any,doctrinal ivergencesbetween the two versions.31n the short prefaceto the Quaestionesuperocto ibroshysicorumristotelissecundumltimamecturamas the full itle usu-allyruns, this text s introduced s Buridan'sauthorizedversion.32

Albert of Saxony'sQuaestionesuper cto ibros hysicorumristotelisave

beenhanded downin 18manuscriptsnd at leastfiveprinted ditions.33On the basis of the attributions n the manuscripts, think hat there sno reason whatsoever o doubtthe authenticityf this work: t is a gen-uine text by Albert of Saxony.This observationmay seemredundant,were it not that Benot Patar, the editor of the Quaestionesuper cto ibrosPhysicorumristotelishas rejectedAlbert's uthorship. e believeshatthistext s aprima ecturayJohn Buridan, nd consequendyefers o Buridan'stertiaecturas the secundaectura34n addition, t seems that the first ive

30 eeDirkanDekker,etijdlosofiean ohannesuridanusf ca. 1360Ph.D.thesis,UniversityfNijmegen,003,9-103.31The tides f he uaestionesf theultimaecturaregivennJ.M.M.H.hijssen,heShortedactionf uridan'suestionsn hehysicsnd heirelationo he uestionsn he hysicsattributedoMarsiliusf nghenin:Archives'histoireoctrinalet ittraireumoyen-ge,52(1986),37-66,sp.240-5.hose fthe ertiaecturareprovidednM.Markowski,LesQuaestionesuper-VIII ibroshysicorumristoteliseNicolasresmeetrouves?,n:MediaevaliaPhilosophicaolonorum,6(1982),9-41,sp.37-41. ee now lsoBenot atar 001{op.it, above, . 13),vol.2, 350-419,or comparisonf the itles. . Maier,weiGrundproblemeer cholastischenaturphilosophie.as Problemerntensivenrediempetustheorie,Roma

1968,70-8

omparedoth ersionsith

especto the

mpetusheory..M.M.H.Thijssen,ohannesuridanusveret neindige.en nderzoekaarn heorieveret neindigenhet aderannwetenschaps-nnatuurfilosofie2vols, ijmegen988,ol.1,7-71omparedboth ersionsith especto Buridan'sheoryf he nfinite.32Approximatelyalf f hemanuscriptsfferhe ollowingreface:Bonum,thabeturprimothicorumquantostmultisommunius,anto stmeliust divinius.ropteruodmultorumediscipuliseu cholaribuseis recibusnclinatusgo liquacribererae-sumpsie difficultatibusibri rimi hysicorumristotelis,t hanc llis cripturamommu-nicare,uianon ossentutdicuntmultan cholisuditainelicuiuscripturaediutoriomemoriaeommendare.uper uibus gopeto t supplicoe omissist minus ene ic-tis btinereeniam,e inventisutemiquaefuerintonvenientiaultas abererateset bonorumcholariumrationes.ee Dekker003op.it., bove,.30),11 and102.33

Sarnowsky989op. it., bove, . 9),439-40,nd450, nd Patar 999op. it.,above,.28), 8*-59*.34 cannoto nto he rgumentsere, ut et the ollowinguotation,hicheemstocaptureatar'soint fdeparture,peakor tself. enotatar 001op.it., bove,n. 13), ol.2,399*:Ilfaut onc ffirmersmaintenantvecforceue aPhysiqueumanuscrit77n'est aset nepeut astre 'AlberteSaxe,uand ienmme ous es


31/155

THEBURIDANCHOOL EASSESSED 29

books of a laterversion f Albert's Quaestionesave beenpreservedn

onemanuscript.35t has not been studiedhere.For the present omparisonof Albert's nd Buridan's PhysicsI have

singledout two case-studies. he first oncerns heproblemof quantityor spatialextension,whereas the secondone concernsBuridan'stheoryof impetus. was led to thischoiceby a suggestionirstmadeinJrgenSarnowsky'sundamentaltudy f Albert of Saxony's Physics.ts implica-tionsfor hewhole dea of a Buridan chool,however,were,to myknowl-edge,neverfurther xplored.Sarnowsky'shesis, orwhich willprovidesome additionalevidence,s that Albert of Saxony'sQuaestionesn thePhysicseed to be placedbetweenBuridan's tertiaecturand his ultimaec-tura.Albertknew Buridan's tertiaecturaf the Physicsnd respondedtoit. Buridan n his ultimaecturain turn, responded o Albertof Saxony'sQuaestionesn the Physics.6

Substancend QuantityIn general,medievalthinkers elievedthat spatialextension elongednthe category f quantity, nd that some substances,uch as bodies,haveextension s their most important eature.However,not only the sub-stanceof body, but also many of its qualitieswere consideredto beextended.he dimensions fSocrates'whiteness,or nstance, erebelievedto coincidewith Socrateshimself, hat s, with substance.But is it reallyaccurate to equate quantitywith substanceand quality,respectively,r

colophonsetousesmanuscritstde touses ncunablese a

plantee ui ttribueraient.

Ilfaut u contraireouteniru'il 'agit e apremireeuvreonnueueBuridan con-sacr laPhysiqueThemanuscriptruges77preservesnanonymousopyf he extthat nothermanuscriptss attributedo Albertf Saxony.one ftheknown anu-scriptsttributeshis ext oJohn uridan.35The ater edactionasbeen reservednthemanuscriptondon, elcome edicalHistoricalibrary, 15, ols.ra-99vb.ooks -8nthismanuscriptoincide ith lbert'susual ext.oth ersionsre tudiednSarnowsky989op.it.,bove,.9),451-60,ndfurtheromparednJrgenarnowski,lace ndpacenAlbertf axony'sommentariesnthe hysicsin:ArabicciencesndPhilosophy,(1999),5-45.Mostecendy,arnowskyhas stablishedhat et notherommentarynthe hysicsttributedoAlbertf axony,wasactuallyomposedyTheodoricfErfurt.ee EinAlberton achsenugeschriebenerPhysikkommentarusderMittees 4.Jahrhundertsin:Medioevo,7 2002),49-74.36Sarnowsky989op.it.,bove,.9),50-1,nd58-9.Note hat ditionsf he el-evantextsre vailablenvol. ofPatar 001op.it.,bove,.13),ol. .Patar ditedthesend ther ragmentsspart fhis, sI believe,ailedttemptoprovehat uridanactuallys the uthor f the ext enerallyttributedo AlbertfSaxony.or he akeof onvenience,will efero Patar's ditionf he assageshat re quotedere.


32/155

30 J.M.M. .THIJSSEN

shouldquantity

e consideredseparate entity? riginally,

hisontolog-ical questionarosein the theologicalontext f Christ's quantity n the

Eucharist, ut it came to be developednto a genuinephilosophicaloc-trine.37n additionto theoretical rguments either f a theologicalr aphilosophicalnature), lso arguments romexperienceplayeda role inthe debate. The most mportant f these s the argument rom onden-sation and rarefaction. riefly tated,the phenomenonof condensationand rarefactioneemed to teach that the extension r quantity f a givensubstancecan vary, whereas the amount of substance nd its qualityremainconstant: o newpartsof substance re added,nor any destroyed(in contrast o the phenomenaof growth nd diminution). his experi-encewas takenas a proofthat extension nd quantitywerereallydis-tinct from ubstance and its qualities. t was the extension nhering nsubstance hat wascorrupted nd generatedn the processof condensa-tion and rarefaction, ot the substance tself.WilliamOckham,on theother hand, arguedthat the condensation nd rarefaction f substancesis causedby the local motionof the partsof substance.n condensationand rarefaction,heparts comespatially losertogether r more distantfrom ach other, respectively,hantheywerebefore.38

AlreadyAnnelieseMaierhad noticedthatJohn Buridan and Albert fSaxonyheld divergent pinionson the issue of the ontologicaltatusofquantity.Buridanarguesthat quantity, r more accurately,magnitude[magnitudo)and substance re reallydistinct.39 lbert of Saxony,on theotherhand,denies hat ubstance ndquantity re really istinct. ccordingto Maier,Albertof Saxonyin his commentaryn the Physicseemedtorespondto two arguments f Buridan.40 he did, however,not includeBuridan's tertiaecturan the comparison,nd did not further eveloptheimplicationsf her insights or the chronologyf these works or for the

37The most ecentarge-scaletudy evotedo the heologicalamificationsf thedebate bout uantitysP.J.J.M.akker,a raisont e miracle.esdoctrinesucharistiques(c.1250-c.400),vols., ijmegen999,sp.vol.1,120-55.38Ockham'siewsrediscussednAnnelieseaier, etaphysischeintergrndeerptscholasti-schenaturphilosophieRoma1955,92-3ndMarilyn cCord dams,Williamckham:VoluntaristrNaturalist?,vols., otre ame1987,ol.1,178-84.39Buridannhisdiscussionf his ntologicalroblemonsistenlyefersomagnitude,ratherhanuantity.isterminologysactuallyore recise,ince he ebate as boutthoseuantitieshat re continuous,.e.,magnitudesdefineds a quantitasontinuaerma-nens, andnot bout hose hat rediscrete.eealsoMaier 955op.it., bove, .38),210for his oint.40Maier1955op. it., bove, . 38),219-21.uridan'siews re discussedn pp.210-8.


33/155


relationship etween Buridan and Albert of Saxony.Nevertheless,erdoctrinal bservations,nd those byJrgen Sarnowskynd Jol Biard,who also studiedthis debate,providean excellent ontext o revealtherelationshipetweenBuridan's nd Albert's ommentariesn the Physics41

The intricacies f the different rguments ro and con need not con-cern us here. What I would like to focuson, are the two argumentsnBuridan'stext o whichAlbert eems to respond.Theybothhingeon aninterpretationf the phenomenon f condensation nd rarefaction. venthoughmedieval authorsfrequently eferred o condensation nd rar-

efactionwhenseeking upport ortheir wn view of substance nd quan-tity, hese twoparticular rguments id not appearin the debatepriorto Buridan and Albertof Saxony.42

In the tertiaecturaf his Quaestionesn the Physicsright t the begin-ningofhisownsolution determinatio, Buridandevelopsn argument romcondensationnd rarefaction hat nvolves n elaborateexperiment. heargument s expressly irectedagainstthose who claim that substanceand quantity oincide, nd who attribute ondensation nd rarefaction olocalmotion,which causes theparts of substance o be more distant rclosertogether romone another,without he addition or corruption fquantity.

Ad stamuaestionemespondeoecundumiamntiquamuodnulla ubstantiastmagnitudoive uodmateriaon stmagnitudo.t adhocadducorimo namrationematuralem:onentesnimuod mnises xtensaitmagnitudoonceduntrarefactionemt condensationemieri ermotumocalemecundumuem artessubstantiaelonganturb invicemelapproximanturd invicemd obtinendumminoremocumbsqueocquod uantitasorrumpatur.43

Against hisview,Buridanpresents counter-example,erived rom xpe-rience. f one openeda pair of bellows vesicato fill hem with air [andthenpluggedthe opening], youwould be unable tonoticeablyondensethe air in the bellowsby compression,uch that t would noticeablybtain

41Sarnowsky989op.it.,bove,.9),92,andJolBiard,onceptionmiologiquee asciencet tatutntologiqueeaquantitansenominalismearisienuXIVe iclein:G. FedericiVescovinindFr.Barocellieds),ilosofia,cienzaastrologiael recentouropeoPadova992,135-54,sp.150-3,ndJoel iard, e a ogiquelaphysique:uantittmouvementelonlbertdeSaxein: Les Etudeshilosophiques,(1996),61-74,sp.366-7. atar001op.it.,above,. 13), ol.1,355*wronglyelieveshatAlbert'snd Buridan'sextsre aboutdifferentoctrinalssues,ndthat heir iews re compatible.42 ambasingmyselfn thematerialn Maier 955op.it., bove, .38),141-223.Amonghe uthorsho,nthis ontext,efero ondensationnd arefaction,reRichardofMediavilla,illiamckham,ndFrancise Marchia.43John uridan,ertiaectura,n:Patar 001op.it., bove, . 13), ol.2, 21,1.75-82.


34/155

32 J.M.M. .THIJSSEN

a smallerspace. Buridan wonderswhy this is so. Accordingto him,neither he air's matter,nor its substantial orm,nor its qualityare theobstacle.44onsequendy, notherdispositionf the air resists heeffortsto condensets parts closertogether n the bellows, nd this s the air'smagnitude : et illa non erit aliud quam magnitudo. n other words,

on the basis of this experiment, uridan concludes thatmagnitude,.e.,quantity, s distinct rom he air's matter, ormor quality.

Tunc ono uodvesicampleaturere:manifestumst uod uper ompressionemnon oterisliumerem otabiliterondensareta uodnotabiliterbtineat inoremlocum;t tarnenubenehabesotestatemovendipsumocaliter.eto rgo uidprohibettquid esistituod unon otespsum onerenminoremocum. onstatquodmateriaonresistit,uiamulto lusde materiaossetnminoreoco;necformaeris esistit,uiaper lterationemxperimurerem,alvataormaua, ossecondensalit rarefierid duplum. uodsicpotestxperiri.apiamusiolamit-ream t calefaciamusarn uperarbones,ostea onamuss fiolaenaqua;vide-bimusuod, uandoer nfilanclususefrigerabitur,uodntantumondensabiturquodoportebitquamscenderen fiola t replere edietatemiolae e remaneatvacuum;rgo x formaeris onrepugnabatuin upossesliumeremompri-mendoondensare.ednec tiamepugnabatxpartealiditatiselfrigiditatis,uiamultolus e caliditateel tiam e frigiditateossetnminoreoco.Ergo raeterhoc rit bi liadispositioocprohibenst llanon rat liud uammagnitudo,ecuius aturastfacereistare:unc nim onpoterasllamorrumpereer uamcompressionem,ednaturaerhuiusmodictionemoteratondensaret rarefacereet non uper ompressionem.45

Buridanprovesthe samepoint by another rgument rom ondensationand rarefaction, hich followsright fter he experimentwith the bel-lows.Supposethat God would condense orrarefy lump[globus)f airwhich ncludeseverything. he condensation r rarefaction ould entaila changeor motion from one dispositionnto another one. Hence,inaddition o the substance f air, onehas to assume the existence f otherdispositions,hichexplainthischange.Or, in otherwords, f air rarefies,it is in a different tate modusehabendi)hanbefore. ince, however, heair itself emains the same,the different ode of beingcan onlyhavebeen causedby an additionaldisposition;nd this preciselys the air'smagnitude.

Item. onamusasumuod itunus lobuseris, mnibusliis ircumscriptis,tDeus liumarefaciatut ondenset;onstatuodbi ritmutatio;t omnismutatiovelmotusstde unadispositionenaliam;giturportetraeterubstantiameris

44That heform f the ir snot heobstaclesprovenn a separatexperiment,involvingheheatingf ir na cup fiola).45John uridan,ertiaecturain:Patar 001op.it.,bove,.13),ol. , 21,1.83-22,1.5 with slighdyodifiedunctuation.


35/155


ponerelias

dispositionesecundum

uaserit lia mutatio. t non

potestici

quodllaedispositionesunt oca, uiasecundumietamositionemon sset bialiquisocus,um ocus it ontinensxtrinsecum;t nos ircumscribebamusmniaextrnseca.

Item.lle er, irarefieret,liomodoe haberetuam nte; t tarnen on ssetaliuser; giturllemoduse habendi iffertb aere, t nonpotestifferreisi itdispositioddita;t lia stmagnitudouam uaerimus.t sta atio otestortificariper yllogismumxpositorum.,46

In quaestio of book 1 of his Quaestionesn the Physicsutrummnis esextensait quantitas, Albert of Saxonytakes on both arguments.They

appearin the

arguments uodnon,that

s,in the

arguments gainsthis

own thesis hatsubstancend quantity oincide.Argument ix and sevenwhichAlbert ists, nd which he attributes o quidamclearlyecho theaboveline of reasoning,ulled fromBuridan's tertiaecturaArgument ixis a paraphraseof Buridan'sexperiment f the condensation nd rare-faction n a pair of bellows. t repeatsthat neither he air's matter, orits form,nor its qualityprevents he bellows frombeingcompressed.

Consequenteruaeriturtrummnises xtensait uantitas.rguituruodnon.Sexto.rguuntuidamic' itunavesicalenaere; uncomprimentillamliquidexistensnvesicaesistit;edhocnec stmateriaeris ecformaeris ecqualitasaeris;ideturrgo uodhoc it uantitaseris. unc ic:quantitaseris n vesicaresistitomprimentit nonmateriaequeormaequeualitaspsiuseris;giturquantitaseris st istinctabhis, tper onsequenssta on unt uantitas;tcumista int xtensa,equituron mnemem xtensamsse uantitatem.uod utemmateriaeris on sistt,atet,uiamateriaeeris on epugnareitareub uan-titate inore,x eoquodlianon eterminatibi liquamertamxtensionem.ecetiamormaeris esistit,uia imiliterormaeeris on epugnareitareub xten-sioneminore;nde ubmultominorextensionealvareturormaeris. ec etiampotestici uod ualitaseris icut st aliditas,umiditas,sistt,uiallis imiliternon epugnaretsse ub xtensioneinore.47

Argument even,alsoexplicitlyttributed o the same quidamrephrasesBuridan's rgument hatthe rarefaction f a bodywith size of one footintoa bodyof twofeet, verythinglsebeing destroyedbydivine mnipo-tence],can onlybe explainedif one assumes thatsomethingnew hasbeen added to the body.But only ts size (< uantitasseems to have beenadded.Consequently, uantity s different rom ubstance.

Septimo.rguuntsti d dem.am, ositouod liquod edale,mni xtrnseconni-hilato,arefiatuod iat ipedale,unc,psoicrarefacto,psumabet e aliteruam

46John uridan,ertiaecturain:Patar 001op.it., bove, . 13), ol.2, 22,1.6-231. 18.47Patar 999 pcit.,bove,.28),vol. ,81,1.44-82,.58,with slightlyodifiedpunctuation.


36/155

34 J.M.M. .THIJSSEN

priusehabuit;

ednoner

habitudinemtcomparationem

ius daliquod

xtrin-secum,xquo quodlibetibi xtrinsecumoniturnnihilatum;gitur ideturuodintrinsecee habeat liter uam riuse habuit.ed nonpossetntrinseceliterehabereuam riusehabuit,isi liquaesde novossetibi uperaddita;ednonvidetursse liaquamnovauantitast extensior;giturideturuod uantitasitunares uperadditaei xtensae.48

Albert resolves he experiment rom he bellowsby pointing ut that tis the form f the mass of air [formaxistensn tantamassamateria)notthe air's form bsolutely aken whichresists he compression.he rar-efaction f a bodyfromone to two feet,on which the other argumenthinges, s attributed o the local motion of the parts [solum ermotumlocalerri).n the hypotheticalase thateverythingxternal o the bodyhasbeen destroyed,nd, consequently,hebodyis not in a different ispo-sitionrelative o anything xternally, t is still rue that ts partsare moredistant rom one another.

Ad sextame vesica icouodnecmateriaeris esistit,ecformabstracta,edformaxistensntantamassamateriae.nde ene erumst uod ormaeris os-set ene sse ubminoreuantitateuandoon ssetntantamateriae;um arnenest ntantamassamateriae,um on ossittarenmateriauantumcumqueensa,ipsa st llud uodresistitomprimenti.Ad aliam icouod ialiquodorpus edale,mni xtrinseconnihilato,arefiatquodfiat ipedale,ico uod, uamvisd nihilxtrinsecume habeat liter uamprius,arnendhuc uaelibetars ius d aliamhabet e aliter uamprius, uiamagisistatbeaquam riusistabatt nonper cquisitionemlicuiuseinovae,sed olumermotumocalem.xhocpatet dargumentum.49

Buridan, n Book1, q. 8 of his ultima ecturaseems to providea directresponse oAlbert's ext.Asin the tertia ecturaBuridanhere too defendsthe thesis hat substance nd magnitudedo not coincide: nulla ubstantiaestmagnitudo.he structure f the argumentwhichBuridanpresents nsupport f his thesis s rather omplex.FirstBuridanpresents numberof traditional rguments gainstthe thesis that substance and quantitycoincide. Eventhoughthesearguments upport Buridan's ownview,hefinds hemajority f them unconvincing.n order to disclosetheirflaws,Buridan sets out to refute hem one by one,as if he himselfwere a pro-ponentof the view that substance nd quantity re identical.50

Ista uaestiost alde ifficilis.ulti nim onunt,t pecialiteroderniuod mnisres xtensastmagnitudoropteructoritatesrius actast rationes,t difficilestdemonstrareppositum.nde ationesuaenoppositumeductaeunt, t npluribus

48Patar 999op.it.,bove,.28),vol.2, 82,1.59-83,.68.49Patar 999op.it., bove,.28),vol.2, 90,1.3-91,. 15.50 ee alsoMaier 955op.it.,bove,.38), 11.


37/155


sophisticaeunt.deo

possuntacilitervadi.Ne

aliquis liquibusllarumationum

acquiescatamquamemonstrationibus,uod ssetnconveniens,t ut lli, uivol-unt stam pinionemenere,ciant vaderellas ationesuae n contrariumibifactaeunt, go c si essem eillaopinione,olo espondered illas ationes.51After hus having willinglyssisted his opponents by refuting hirteenargumentsn supportof his own view,Buridan still maintains hat nosubstance oincideswithquantity.

Nonobstanteamenuod icpossuntolvi elevadi ationesraedictae,goponoconclusionemuodnulla ubstantiastmagnitudo.52

Onlyat this stageof the quaestioBuridanprovides heargumentswhichhe findsreallyconvincing. he most important roof for his own viewagainis the experiment ith he bellows.The ultimaecturaasically epeatsthe experiment rom he tertia ecturathough n a more carefully evel-opedversion nd with a more drawn-out onclusion.

Hoc declaraturupponendouodaer manensdem ecundumubstantiamotestmultumarefierit condensaliercalefactionemt frigefactionem.uodexperi-mentaliterpparet,uia, ifiola itreaalefiatuperarbones,er nterior ultumrarefitntantumuod,i os fiolaeonaturnaquafrigidaulo ersouperius,umperparvamormemporiser nteriorefrigerabitur,lle ntantumondensabiturquodoportebitquamscenderenfiolamsqued mediamius epletionem,esit acuum,uia er nteriorondensatusbtinet inoremocumnsubduplouamante,um ssetarior.osteaer xperientiamgo upponouod rahendoel om-primendoerem ine alefactioneelfrigefactione,u nonpoteseremntantum,scilicetdduplumondensareelrarefacere,icut ictumst, uantumupotes ercalefactionemelfrigefactionem;uodpatetn follibus.am i atera ollisint er-fecteb nvicemlevata,t ntra it eris lenitudotobstruanturene mnia oram-inafollis,unon oterisomprimereatera ollisdsubduplum,mmo ec daliquamnotabilemuantitatem;gitur ercompressionemu nonpotes otabiliteronden-sare erem.imiliter,i ateraint on erfecteedmediomodo b invicemlevata,et omnia oramina

bstruantur,unon

oterismpliusotabiliterlevareateraol-

lis,ne sitdarevacuum.octamen uposses,iposseser ractionemotabiliterrarefacereerem icut uposseser alefactionem.uncgituruaero, uidprohi-bet uod gonon ossemondensareotabilitererem xistentemnteratera ollisper ompressionematerumel tiam otabiliterarefacereer levationem?onstatbene uodcausahuius eddi onpotest isi onamusimensionemistinctammateriat forma,caliditatet frigiditatet huiusmodiualitatibus;uaepraedicta

51ThepassagesfBuridan'suaestionesuperibroshysicorum,ecundumltimameduramarequotedromhe orthcomingriticaldition.ooksand I have een reparedyOlaf luta. hefollowingwomanuscriptsave een sed o stablishhe ext:openhagen,Detkongeligeibliotk,ykongeligmling,od. 1801 ol.C),fol. 3rb nd Krakw,Bibliotkaagielloska,od. 1771G),fol. Ora.A slightlyifferentditionf Book,q.8 ofBuridan'sltimaecturaanbe foundnPatar 001op.it.,bove, . 13),ol.2,120-4.52John uridan,ltimaecturaC,fol. 4ra ndG,fol. Ovb.


38/155


omniaint xtensaicut nomodomotu,uem

ocamusocalem,

olumum mnibussibinhaerentibusovetur.Sed huiusmodiimensionemonendoospossumusotumalvare.icimusnimquodicut lbedo atesse lbumormaliter,icmagnitudo,uaeest xtensio,atesse xtensumtmagnum.t sicutneodemubiectolus e albedineat sse lbiusetplus e caliditatea

Vivarium - Vol Xlii, No 1, 2004

Documents

Transcript of Vivarium - Vol Xlii, No 1, 2004